On 1/29/07, Levi Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It sounds like you're trying to disagree with me, but this is exactly
what I've been saying. A reasonably-sized thread pool is not what I
meant by massively multithreaded, and is precisely what I advocated
once he expressed concern over CPU utilization on a multi-processor
machine.
You're right. woot.
The link works for me. Google for 'apache vs yaws' if it continues to
I'm proxied, maybe that's why. I'll try it at home.
comparison, but rather the naive "one thread per connection" model
Agreed, that is a bad way to go.
Creation time is not the only issue. System resource utilization by
threads is also significant, since a new process structure and a new
stack space must be allocated for each thread. Scaling to the 100k+
thread level may even require a kernel recompile to make more space,
depending on how the kernel is configured by the distro. Clearly a
thread pool doesn't have this problem, though.
Agreed.
Again, this is pretty much what I've been saying. Hopefully it will
be convincing coming from so many people.
--Levi
Sheesh. I should just learn lisp and then we'd be twins!
-Bryan
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
