Re: LinuxThreads replacement
From: Petri Helenius (pete_at_he.iki.fi)
Date: 07/12/03
- Previous message: Gary Stanley: "Re: SCSI Bus tuning."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
To: "Mike Makonnen" <mtm@identd.net> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 22:51:24 +0300
>
> It's not as simple as that. In practice a lot of factors about
> your system and the type of work you're doing will affect the
> performance. On paper, the SA/KSE method is supposed to combine
> the best aspects of 1:1 (libthr) and N:1 (libc_r), and should
> threoretically be "better" than either one. But, in practice,
> complexity and overhead may drown out the performance gains.
> Conversely, context switching overhead may not be as great a
> penalty for the 1:1 model on modern cpus.
>
Anyone have any numbers of different architechtures for the context
switch? AMD64? Itanium? i386? PPC? Sparc? How about interrupt
latency? SMP coherency overhead?
The basic memory bandwidth has become a marketing thing so
the raw megabytes per second are readily available but in multiprocessor
and multithreaded environment there is a lot more into it.
Pete
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: Gary Stanley: "Re: SCSI Bus tuning."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
