On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 8:38 AM, Janko Mivšek <[email protected]>wrote:
> Philippe Marschall pravi: > >> Michael van der Gulik wrote: > > >> So now it seems that Gemstone is the only multi-core capable Smalltalk > >> VM :-(. > > > AFAIK Gemstone isn't multi-core capable as well. You can just run > > multiple gems and they share the same persistent memory. Which is > > similar but different. > > Well, Gemstone can for sure be considered as multi-core capable. Every > gem runs on its own process and therefore can run on its own CPU core. > All gems then share a Shared Memory Cache. So, a typical multi-core > scenario. > > By multi-core, I mean that the following code would spread CPU usage over at least two cores of a CPU or computer for a while: | sum1 sum2 | sum1 := 0. sum2 := 0. [ 1 to: 10000000 do: [ :i | sum1 := sum1 + 1 ] ] fork. [ 1 to: 10000000 do: [ :i | sum2 := sum2 + 1 ] ] fork. (I didn't try the above so there might be obvious bugs) If a VM can't distribute the load for the above over two or more CPU cores, I consider its multi-core capabilities a hack. No offense intended to the Hydra VM. I'm feeling a bit disheartened by the fact that there aren't any Smalltalk VMs, commercial or not, that can do fine-grained parallelism. Gulik. -- http://gulik.pbwiki.com/
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
