* Michael K. Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...] Unless you essentially lock one application thread to each CPU
> core, with a complete understanding of its cache sharing and latency
> relationships to all the other cores, and do your own userspace I/O
> scheduling and dispatching state machine -- which is what all
> industrial-strength databases and other sorts of transaction engines
> currently do -- you get the same old best-effort context-thrashing
> scheduler we've had since Solaris 2.0.
the syslet/threadlet framework has been derived from Tux, which one can
accuse of may things, but which i definitely can not accuse of being
slow. It has no relationship whatsoever to Solaris 2.0 or later.
Your other mail showed that you have very basic misunderstandings about
how threadlets work, on which you based a string of firm but incorrect
conclusions. In this discussion i'm mostly interested in specific
feedback about syslets/threadlets - thankfully we are past the years of
"unless Linux does generic technique X it will stay a hobby OS forever"
type of time-wasting discussions.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
