Unsubscribe
Unsubscribe this mailing list
sunWJit
Hi, has anybody tried sunwjit with blackdown 1.1.7 ? I tried it and it seems that blackdown with this JIT is slower then without it. Has anybody any ideas whats going on ? Thanks Holger -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re:Re: ServletEngine for linux : THX
Thanks for your help. Mark -Original Message- From: Steve Nguyen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wednesday, June 23, 1999 8:59 PM Subject: Re:Re: ServletEngine for linux >Try mySQL. It also has JDBC type-4 support and works beatifully as well. >Of course Apache JServ is beatiful too. > >Steve Nguyen >KBMail Software & Service Provider >http://www.kbmail.com > > > Original message >Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 03:19:20 +0100 >From: Rachel Greenham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: ServletEngine for linux >-- > >Jaco de Groot wrote: >> >> Mark Minnoye wrote: >> > >> > Hi All, >> > >> > I'm not a real linux-user, but i am a java-developer. I'm looking for a >> > good (and cheap) servletEngine for Linux. Could you be so nice to give me >> > some advise please? >> > I'm also looking for some (native if possible) JDBC-drivers for >> > M$SQL-server, Sybase, oracle & informix. >> > Any help would be appriciated ... >> > > > > >-- >To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Java 1.2 pre2 and SMP?
Just to add a data point: I've experienced the same. Also using SuSE 6.1 (SMP 2.2.10 kernel, I don't know which libc but I think not glibc2.1) on a dual PII box. Green threads don't work at all, native threads seem to be less stable than the same on a single processor box (which is a mobile Pentium/MMX in my case, with the exact same SuSE installation). Rachel wrote: >Java 1.2 green threads won't start on one system: It just hangs taking >all processor time and memory. This is a Dual PII machine with SMP >running kernel 2.2.9 and I've reported this as a bug to Blackdown. It's >not my software: it happens even if I just run "java" on its own. > >Java 1.2 *native* threads seems to work fine, and really fast too (no >JIT even) on the same machine, but software problems exist - those I >think are mine I've fixed, but something weird is happening wrt Postgres >6.5 - more detail later. > -- Cees de Groot http://www.cdegroot.com <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JDK 1.2.2 Performance
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Things will improve -- they've already started to improve -- but not as >fast as you'd like. The reality of the Linux revolution is that manning >the barricades gives you the responsibility to help make things better >and forfeits you the right to bitch and moan about them. That ethos has >led to a stunningly good operating system. > Well, not in this case because the Blackdown effort is clearly a very closed effort. At least, I haven't been able to discover how to become involved in the port, and questions on this list about how to contribute have been left unanswered (or vaguely answered at best). Even though I appreciate the work of the Blackdown people, they're terribly bad at the publicity side, and probably doing too much with too few. I really hope that IBM gets a 1.2 JDK out quickly so we don't need to rely on a port of the reference JDK anymore. -- Cees de Groot http://www.cdegroot.com <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JVM on multiprocessor Linux systems
I would like to know if there is a different version of the JVM compiled for multiprocessor Linux systems than for uniprocessor. Has anybody experienced any problems or performance issues with using the uniprocessor version on multiprocessor systems ? Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Dan Iuster [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Java 1.2 pre2 and SMP?
Cees de Groot wrote: > > Just to add a data point: I've experienced the same. Also using SuSE 6.1 > (SMP 2.2.10 kernel, I don't know which libc but I think not glibc2.1) on > a dual PII box. Green threads don't work at all, native threads seem > to be less stable than the same on a single processor box (which is > a mobile Pentium/MMX in my case, with the exact same SuSE installation). Update as time goes on: 1.2 native threads & JIT on SMP is unstable after all. 1.2 green threads & JIT on SMP doesn't start at all. 1.2 green threads & no JIT on SMP seems to be fine. 1.2 native threads & JIT on single-processor system still going strong! -- Rachel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: ServletEngine for linux
I use the free version of JRun. http://www.livesoftware.com Rob > -Original Message- > From: Jason Proctor [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 1999 1:11 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: ServletEngine for linux > > >I'm not a real linux-user, but i am a java-developer. I'm looking for a > >good (and cheap) servletEngine for Linux. Could you be so nice to give > me > >some advise please? > > I've been using JServ on Linux and NT for about 6 months now. It's free > and > stable, and the community support via the mailing list is excellent. > > http://java.apache.org > > >I'm also looking for some (native if possible) JDBC-drivers for > >M$SQL-server, Sybase, oracle & informix. > > Most database vendors have their own - well at least Oracle does. Check > out > the website appropriate to the vendor. > > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Java 1.2 pre2 and SMP?
On Thu, 24 Jun 1999 19:52:20 +0100, Rachel Greenham wrote: >Cees de Groot wrote: >> >> Just to add a data point: I've experienced the same. Also using SuSE 6.1 >> (SMP 2.2.10 kernel, I don't know which libc but I think not glibc2.1) on >> a dual PII box. Green threads don't work at all, native threads seem >> to be less stable than the same on a single processor box (which is >> a mobile Pentium/MMX in my case, with the exact same SuSE installation). > >Update as time goes on: > >1.2 native threads & JIT on SMP is unstable after all. Have you tried native threads & no JIT on SMP yet? I just wonder if the problem is in the JIT or in the JVM. Michael Sinz -- Director of Research & Development, NextBus Inc. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.nextbus.com My place on the web ---> http://www.users.fast.net/~michael_sinz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JVM on multiprocessor Linux systems
> Dan Iuster wrote: > > I would like to know if there is a different version of the JVM > compiled for multiprocessor Linux systems than for uniprocessor. > > Has anybody experienced any problems or performance issues with using > the uniprocessor version on multiprocessor systems ? > > Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. No special versions. If you're asking about JDK1.2, the reason it's still at prerelease is some stability problems with native threads (which you're presumably using given your interest in multiprocessing). The porting team hasn't provided much detail about the nature of the problems, but they've caused an impressive release delay and are apparently vigorously resisting cure. Nathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Java 1.2 pre2 and SMP?
Rachel - I also am running an SMP kernel with a RedHat 5.2 installation. I have found the same observations that you did regarding native and green threads. Unfortunately, green thread with no JIT is really a pain. My observation about native threads and JIT on a multiprocessor system is that sometimes calls get scheduled on the second processor and do not return to the correct location (i.e. to the original calling function), they get stuck returning on the other processor and the original call crashes with a null status, or times out. I submitted a more detailed report to the Blackdown jitterbug site. I think it was #591. Mike -Original Message- From: Rachel Greenham [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 24, 1999 2:52 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: Java 1.2 pre2 and SMP? Cees de Groot wrote: > > Just to add a data point: I've experienced the same. Also using SuSE 6.1 > (SMP 2.2.10 kernel, I don't know which libc but I think not glibc2.1) on > a dual PII box. Green threads don't work at all, native threads seem > to be less stable than the same on a single processor box (which is > a mobile Pentium/MMX in my case, with the exact same SuSE installation). Update as time goes on: 1.2 native threads & JIT on SMP is unstable after all. 1.2 green threads & JIT on SMP doesn't start at all. 1.2 green threads & no JIT on SMP seems to be fine. 1.2 native threads & JIT on single-processor system still going strong! -- Rachel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JVM on multiprocessor Linux systems
> Dan Iuster wrote: > > I would like to know if there is a different version of the JVM > compiled for multiprocessor Linux systems than for uniprocessor. > > Has anybody experienced any problems or performance issues with using > the uniprocessor version on multiprocessor systems ? I'm curious about this as well. I've been playing around with the JDK 1.2-pre2 on my spanking new Dual-PII machine recently to see how well it handles SMP and I've noticed that with either native or green threads, it only seems to use a single CPU for running Java apps. I've noticed this same behaviour in 1.1.7v3, so I'm not 100% sure I'm not just doing something wrong like not setting some env var to tell the JDK to use multi CPUs. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- With Microsoft products, failure is not Derek Glidden an option - it's a standard component. http://3dlinux.org/ Choose your life. Choose yourhttp://www.tbcpc.org/ future. Choose Linux. http://www.illusionary.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JVM on multiprocessor Linux systems
On Thu, Jun 24, 1999 at 12:47:17PM -0700, Nathan Meyers wrote: > > Dan Iuster wrote: > > > > I would like to know if there is a different version of the JVM > > compiled for multiprocessor Linux systems than for uniprocessor. > > > > Has anybody experienced any problems or performance issues with using > > the uniprocessor version on multiprocessor systems ? > > > > Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. > > No special versions. If you're asking about JDK1.2, the reason it's > still at prerelease is some stability problems with native threads > (which you're presumably using given your interest in multiprocessing). > The porting team hasn't provided much detail about the nature of the > problems, but they've caused an impressive release delay and are > apparently vigorously resisting cure. > > Nathan At the Java-Linux BOF at JavaOne, Steve talked a little about some of the delays. What I got as one of the main problems was a very difficult problem of Linux native threads and signal-handling in the JVM. Steve said that they are not only just porting, but also trying to add value to the code by eliminating some of the more problematic code (read more Solaris-specific) to try to make future ports easier. This, in theory, should make all future ports easier and better (more portable code constructions). What is uncertain is whether or not Sun will incorporate some of the constructions that are a part of this port. I hope I'm not putting words in Steve's mouth, just trying to help out with more info. -Bryan -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JVM on multiprocessor Linux systems
Derek Glidden wrote: > > > Dan Iuster wrote: > > > > I would like to know if there is a different version of the JVM > > compiled for multiprocessor Linux systems than for uniprocessor. > > > > Has anybody experienced any problems or performance issues with using > > the uniprocessor version on multiprocessor systems ? > > I'm curious about this as well. I've been playing around with the JDK > 1.2-pre2 on my spanking new Dual-PII machine recently to see how well it > handles SMP and I've noticed that with either native or green threads, > it only seems to use a single CPU for running Java apps. I've noticed > this same behaviour in 1.1.7v3, so I'm not 100% sure I'm not just doing > something wrong like not setting some env var to tell the JDK to use > multi CPUs. A look at the process list shows that the native-threads version is definitely creating multiple threads. (Linux threads get their own process table entries; if you don't see multiple ps entries, you're either running green threads or have some degenerate libpthreads that implements the API in user space.) I would think, given the clear presence of multiple threads, that assignment to CPUs is out of the JVM's hands. Assuming you really do have multiple threads concurrently consuming CPU time, failure to engage multiple CPUs sounds like something broken in the OS. Obvious dumb question: you are running the SMP kernel, yes? Nathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JVM on multiprocessor Linux systems
bryan vold wrote: > At the Java-Linux BOF at JavaOne, Steve talked a little about some of the > delays. What I got as one of the main problems was a very difficult > problem of Linux native threads and signal-handling in the JVM. Steve said > that they are not only just porting, but also trying to add value to the > code by eliminating some of the more problematic code (read more > Solaris-specific) to try to make future ports easier. This, in theory, > should make all future ports easier and better (more portable code > constructions). What is uncertain is whether or not Sun will incorporate > some of the constructions that are a part of this port. I hope I'm not > putting words in Steve's mouth, just trying to help out with more info. Thanks! This is the sort of info that doesn't show up in the daily ZDNet dispatches to the provinces. Nathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Java 1.2 pre2 and SMP?
Michael Sinz wrote: > > On Thu, 24 Jun 1999 19:52:20 +0100, Rachel Greenham wrote: > > >Cees de Groot wrote: > >> > >> Just to add a data point: I've experienced the same. Also using SuSE 6.1 > >> (SMP 2.2.10 kernel, I don't know which libc but I think not glibc2.1) on > >> a dual PII box. Green threads don't work at all, native threads seem > >> to be less stable than the same on a single processor box (which is > >> a mobile Pentium/MMX in my case, with the exact same SuSE installation). > > > >Update as time goes on: > > > >1.2 native threads & JIT on SMP is unstable after all. > > Have you tried native threads & no JIT on SMP yet? I just wonder if > the problem is in the JIT or in the JVM. I will try it. But no immediate promise of when, it's a live server. native+JIT seemed stable for a while - I think it died after or during my running *another* java instantiation - a program to do a database import. Normal day-to-day running seemed to be going fine until then. -- Rachel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Java 1.2 pre2 and SMP?
"Hopple, Michael R (CRD)" wrote: > > Rachel - > > I also am running an SMP kernel with a RedHat 5.2 installation. I have found the >same observations > that you did regarding native and green threads. Unfortunately, green thread with >no JIT is really a > pain. Well, as it's all I had under 1.1.7 before the upgrade, I consider it no loss, and on this particular site, the real intensive work is done by Postgres rather than Java. But yes, while native+JIT was working it was glorious! -- Rachel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JVM on multiprocessor Linux systems
Nathan Meyers wrote: > > > I'm curious about this as well. I've been playing around with the JDK > > 1.2-pre2 on my spanking new Dual-PII machine recently to see how well it > > handles SMP and I've noticed that with either native or green threads, > > it only seems to use a single CPU for running Java apps. I've noticed > > this same behaviour in 1.1.7v3, so I'm not 100% sure I'm not just doing > > something wrong like not setting some env var to tell the JDK to use > > multi CPUs. > > A look at the process list shows that the native-threads version is > definitely creating multiple threads. (Linux threads get their own > process table entries; if you don't see multiple ps entries, you're > either running green threads or have some degenerate libpthreads that > implements the API in user space.) > > I would think, given the clear presence of multiple threads, that > assignment to CPUs is out of the JVM's hands. Assuming you really do > have multiple threads concurrently consuming CPU time, failure to engage > multiple CPUs sounds like something broken in the OS. Obvious dumb > question: you are running the SMP kernel, yes? Several entries do show up in the process table when using the native thread version of the JDK, and I agree that once the JDK asks the OS to create threads, it's in the hands of the OS, which is why it puzzles me that load meters only show 50% load on a dual-processor machine when running native-thread JDK and multithreaded Java apps and why I was hoping that I was just missing some command-line switch or something. And yes, I am running an SMP kernel. I can easily make the system reach 100% load if I run several apps simultaneously. I am, of course, assuming that monitors are accurate, but since they report the expected results under different loads, I suspect they are. (i.e. they show ~50% usage when running a single CPU-intensive app, ~100% usage when running two CPU-intensive apps, when one of those apps finishes ahead of the other, the usage drops back down to ~50%, etc) The machine is a glibc2.0 based machine running kernel 2.2.10 with all the appropriate package upgrades from all the older 2.0-based apps to the ones built for the 2.2 kernels. I'm using the glibc2.0-compiled JDK 1.2-pre2 as well. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- With Microsoft products, failure is not Derek Glidden an option - it's a standard component. http://3dlinux.org/ Choose your life. Choose yourhttp://www.tbcpc.org/ future. Choose Linux. http://www.illusionary.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JVM on multiprocessor Linux systems
Derek Glidden wrote: > > Nathan Meyers wrote: > > > > > I'm curious about this as well. I've been playing around with the JDK > > > 1.2-pre2 on my spanking new Dual-PII machine recently to see how well it > > > handles SMP and I've noticed that with either native or green threads, > > > it only seems to use a single CPU for running Java apps. I've noticed > > > this same behaviour in 1.1.7v3, so I'm not 100% sure I'm not just doing > > > something wrong like not setting some env var to tell the JDK to use > > > multi CPUs. > > > > A look at the process list shows that the native-threads version is > > definitely creating multiple threads. (Linux threads get their own > > process table entries; if you don't see multiple ps entries, you're > > either running green threads or have some degenerate libpthreads that > > implements the API in user space.) > > > > I would think, given the clear presence of multiple threads, that > > assignment to CPUs is out of the JVM's hands. Assuming you really do > > have multiple threads concurrently consuming CPU time, failure to engage > > multiple CPUs sounds like something broken in the OS. Obvious dumb > > question: you are running the SMP kernel, yes? > > Several entries do show up in the process table when using the native > thread version of the JDK, and I agree that once the JDK asks the OS to > create threads, it's in the hands of the OS, which is why it puzzles me > that load meters only show 50% load on a dual-processor machine when > running native-thread JDK and multithreaded Java apps and why I was > hoping that I was just missing some command-line switch or something. OK... so one other question you haven't answered. Are you sure you've got two threads staying busy? Most of Java's threads spend most of their time sitting around and waiting. If you've really got two threads spinning and you're not seeing 100% load, something's strange -- and it's not a command-line switch. Nathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JVM on multiprocessor Linux systems
> bryan vold writes: bryan> At the Java-Linux BOF at JavaOne, Steve talked a little bryan> about some of the delays. What I got as one of the main bryan> problems was a very difficult problem of Linux native bryan> threads and signal-handling in the JVM. Steve said that bryan> they are not only just porting, but also trying to add bryan> value to the code by eliminating some of the more bryan> problematic code (read more Solaris-specific) to try to bryan> make future ports easier. This, in theory, should make all bryan> future ports easier and better (more portable code bryan> constructions). What is uncertain is whether or not Sun bryan> will incorporate some of the constructions that are a part bryan> of this port. They do. Take http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4196807.html as an example, though the bug is not closed yet. Juergen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JVM on multiprocessor Linux systems
Nathan Meyers wrote:
>
> OK... so one other question you haven't answered. Are you sure you've
> got two threads staying busy? Most of Java's threads spend most of their
> time sitting around and waiting. If you've really got two threads
> spinning and you're not seeing 100% load, something's strange -- and
> it's not a command-line switch.
I don't know for sure since, as I said, I haven't done a lot of
multi-threaded programming. I've run a few third-party Java apps, but
have no idea on the whole how thread-intensive any of them are.
These two classes are a couple of stupid little things I wrote to see if
I understood Java's threading and this is what I've been primarily
running to see if I can get the JDK to use more than one CPU
simultaneously.
[threadone.java:]
import java.io.*;
import java.lang.*;
public class threadone extends Thread {
String msg = null;
threadone(String message) {
super();
msg = message;
}
public void run() {
for(int x = 0; x < 100; x++) {
System.out.println(msg);
yield();
}
}
}
[mythreads.java:]
import java.io.*;
import java.lang.*;
public class mythreads {
public static void main(String args[]) {
int numthreads = 100;
for (int i = 0; i < numthreads; i++) {
threadone t = new threadone("This is thread " + i);
t.start();
}
}
}
Assuming this does what I think it should do - start a bunch of threads
all concurrently printing a silly message to the console (unless they're
blocking each other at some level because of the console output, which
is entirely possible) - this app will only hit 50% usage on my SMP
system using native_threads.
But, like I said, running *any* Java app with native_threads set on my
SMP box only ever results in 50% usage. I find it awfully hard to
believe that I have not yet encountered a truly multithreaded Java app
that can fully take advantage of more than one CPU - and this is true of
both 1.1.7v3 and 1.2-pre2 on this box.
I've not been using a JIT in any of these cases to try to limit the
possible variables.
Thanks for taking the time to help out and also confirming that, as I
thought, this is (as they say) passing strange behaviour.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
With Microsoft products, failure is not Derek Glidden
an option - it's a standard component. http://3dlinux.org/
Choose your life. Choose yourhttp://www.tbcpc.org/
future. Choose Linux. http://www.illusionary.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JVM on multiprocessor Linux systems
Derek Glidden wrote:
> I don't know for sure since, as I said, I haven't done a lot of
> multi-threaded programming. I've run a few third-party Java apps, but
> have no idea on the whole how thread-intensive any of them are.
>
> These two classes are a couple of stupid little things I wrote to see if
> I understood Java's threading and this is what I've been primarily
> running to see if I can get the JDK to use more than one CPU
> simultaneously.
Too much task-switching and I/O going on. Take out the println, take out
the yield, and just spin forever:
for (;;);
Run with native threads, of course. Two threads ought to do it.
Terminate with ctrl-C.
Nathan
> [threadone.java:]
>
> import java.io.*;
> import java.lang.*;
>
> public class threadone extends Thread {
>
> String msg = null;
>
> threadone(String message) {
> super();
> msg = message;
> }
>
> public void run() {
> for(int x = 0; x < 100; x++) {
> System.out.println(msg);
> yield();
> }
> }
> }
>
> [mythreads.java:]
>
> import java.io.*;
> import java.lang.*;
>
> public class mythreads {
> public static void main(String args[]) {
>
> int numthreads = 100;
>
> for (int i = 0; i < numthreads; i++) {
> threadone t = new threadone("This is thread " + i);
> t.start();
> }
> }
> }
>
> Assuming this does what I think it should do - start a bunch of threads
> all concurrently printing a silly message to the console (unless they're
> blocking each other at some level because of the console output, which
> is entirely possible) - this app will only hit 50% usage on my SMP
> system using native_threads.
>
> But, like I said, running *any* Java app with native_threads set on my
> SMP box only ever results in 50% usage. I find it awfully hard to
> believe that I have not yet encountered a truly multithreaded Java app
> that can fully take advantage of more than one CPU - and this is true of
> both 1.1.7v3 and 1.2-pre2 on this box.
>
> I've not been using a JIT in any of these cases to try to limit the
> possible variables.
>
> Thanks for taking the time to help out and also confirming that, as I
> thought, this is (as they say) passing strange behaviour.
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> With Microsoft products, failure is not Derek Glidden
> an option - it's a standard component. http://3dlinux.org/
> Choose your life. Choose yourhttp://www.tbcpc.org/
> future. Choose Linux. http://www.illusionary.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JVM on multiprocessor Linux systems
> To: bryan vold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > From: Juergen Kreileder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 25 Jun 1999 01:58:33 +0200 > > bryan> What is uncertain is whether or not Sun > bryan> will incorporate some of the constructions that are a part > bryan> of this port. > > They do. Take > http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4196807.html as > an example, though the bug is not closed yet. > > Juergen 4196807 is misleading in that it hints that the work might be done for 1.2.2. It will not be. 1.2.2 has been clamped. Some of the 1.2 Linux port changes are already in the 1.3 tree, however. Hopefully by time 1.3 ships all changes will make it, and one should be able to type `make' and have the sources build on Linux (no promises though). -Anand. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problem in running RMI server : JDK1.2v2 / RH6.0 / glibc2.1
Hi, I am running a simple RMI test application. But after doing the "Naming.rebind()" the server simply comes out. There is no exception or anything. But instead of waiting for the Client connection, it exits normally after binding to rmiregistry. My system has RH6.0 with glibc2.1. I am not able to run the native thread executables, so I was trying with the green thread ones. Can that be a problem ? Pratip -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JDK1.2 on Slackware3.5 problems.
Hi all, I have Slackware3.5(2.0.34 Linux kernel,libc.so.5.4.44) loaded on 586(IBM) machine.I have loaded JDK1.2 (jdk1.2pre-v1.tar.bz2) on this Linux machine. When I execute any JAVA commands (java,javac etc) it is giving following error : for 'java' : --- /nagaraj/jdk1.2/jre/bin/realpath : /nagaraj/jdk1.2/jre/bin/i386/realpath: No such file or directory. /nagaraj/jdk1.2/jre/bin/realpath : /nagaraj/jdk1.2/jre/bin/i386/realpath: No such file or directory. /nagaraj/jdk1.2/bin/java :/nagaraj/jdk1.2/bin/i386/native_threads/java: No such file or directory. /nagaraj/jdk1.2/bin/java : /nagaraj/jdk1.2/bin/i386/native_threads/java: No such file or directory. - I have set PATH to '/nagaraj/jdk1.2/bin' directory. Pls. help in solving this problem. Thanks in advance, Nagaraj S.B. Bells Softech Ltd,Bells House,1036, 26th Main,4th 'T' Block, Jayanagar, Banglore - 560 041.Ph.No.:6650084/33. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
