-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I meant this to be sent to the mailing list, but I selected "Reply"
originally instead of "Reply To All"
- ---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Subject: Re: Java/Linux at JavaOne
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 21:23:46 +1000
From: Jesus M. Salvo Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 30 May 2001 16:27, Christopher Smith wrote:
> So, the thread issue is a nasty one, particularly if you're say hosting
> servlets on Linux. 90% of the reason you need all these threads is due to
> the thread-per-IO model in standard Java I/O. Unfortunately, this doesn't
> map too efficiently to the 1-1 thread model found in most Linux JVM's.
> There are a few strategies for coping with this:
>
> 1) Use green threads (people don't normally think of this as an OK solution
> for an application server)
> 2) Have a C or other application multiplex the I/O either over sockets or
> JMS.
> 3) Use lots of boxes & tweak the kernel to allow as many threads as
> possible.
> 4) Use JNI to use Linux's various asynch I/O API's.
Option 4) is how BEA WebLogic Server does it, ( I think ). They have this
libmuxer.so ( which is also available for Solaris -- dont know why when JVM
for Solaris makes use of solaris native threads ) which enables native I/O,
or the so-called "performance pack".
> The good news is Linux's thread model is moving in a direction to better
> support Java's approach to I/O (IBM's next generation pthreads
> implementation), and Java's approach to I/O (NIO) is moving closer to the
> efficient way to do I/O with Linux. Indeed, we're working on some
> benchmarks right now for #4 and also using NIO to see just how far Linux
> will go. My bet is Linux is actually going to prove very cost-effective in
> terms of scalability with this stuff.
Speaking of 4), does anyway have a ready-made ( cut&paste ) C code that one
can compile into a shared library and have all I/O made through this library
via JNI?
And how does JDK 1.4 affect the performance on Linux, given that 1.4 was
better I/O support overall, in particular non-blocking I/O.
> --Chris
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iEYEARECAAYFAjsU2EUACgkQAvd5SY4qWYzDqACfQPZ3+6d+/aeQZObLPkL7YkdY
1Z8AnjOwJMv0djUbLzWkjARwnEqLvgzI
=gsnA
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- -------------------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iEYEARECAAYFAjsVW9gACgkQAvd5SY4qWYyPuQCfXRBxMHYDx/p+ygYHnfGsZqAb
bPUAoI0qAXvk0NPRZkLfmh8/j3owoF8P
=YWRW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
