Toby Dickenson wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2000 09:39:54 -0600, Bill Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >What OS is this on?
> All of them ;-)
> >On Linux each thread does _NOT_ get a copy of the
> >ODB. It just _looks_ like it.
> I suspect you are referring to the characteristic that several Linux
> memory-reporting tools list the memory used by one Zope process once
> for each thread.
> That's not the characteristic I am referring to....Each zope publisher
> thread really does have its own copy of the ZODB object cache.

of the Object CACHE, that I can by, of the ZODB itsself, no.

> You can verify this by checking the value "Total number of objects in
> all of the caches combined" from Control Panel. This number should be
> roughly (number of threads) * (target size), although there are many
> factors that can affect it.
> >See the archives for details. The benefit
> >from smaller thread counts is that:
> >A) Multiple threads is not a big boost on uniprocessor machines
> This is only true if Zope is saturating your processor. It may not be
> true if you are publishing any methods that are mostly I/O (file
> access, or other web requests)

I am only talking about Zope's use of it here. _Zope_ doesn't gain much
from multiple CPUs.

( I have machines here that have _many_ processors, and only two that
have less than two )


Zope maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - )

Reply via email to