Hi,
Thank you for bringing up this question. I also have problems with
multiple threads in Linux. In my case the behavior of threads with
JNI is different from pure Java behavior.
I use SwingWorker class. If I don't have JNI methods I don't have
to use yield() method. If I replace my Java methods with JNI calls
I must use yield(), otherwise the application simply does not work.
There is no mentioning of yield() method in any SwingWorker-related
documentation.
It would be nice to know more about multithreading features of Linux
JVM.
Jacob Nikom
> Evandro Luquini wrote:
>
> Hi,
> In the JavaWord article called "programming Java threads in the real
> world, Part 1(
> http://www.javaworld.com/jw-09-1998/jw-09-threads.html)", the author
> sad that "Java's promise of platform independence falls flat on its
> face in the threads arena". If you read this paper you will can see
> two plataform example : NT and Solaris.
>
> Major question is what scheduling is implemented by the Linux JVM and
> the Linux OS. Does it use a nonpreemptive our preemptive scheduler ?
>
> The other important question is about what thread's architecture is
> implement by Linux O.S. I am asking it because in the sun's paper
> "Multithreading: General And Java-Specific Information
>
>(http://www.sun.com/solaris/java/wp-java/4.html;$sessionid$5CBVN2YAAI4VTAMW0JZE3NUBS1JHEUDO)"
> sad : "Understanding the architectural advantages of one native MT
> environment/architecture over another is critical to an understanding
> of the advantages of one Java implementation over another. Since a
> typical JVM runtime is implemented on top of the traditional platform,
> a richer, architecturally superior MT platform will obviously
> translate to a superior Java MT environment for Java applications on
> that platform. The native OS threads model greatly influences Java
> application performance."
>
> Thanks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
