Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 13:39:31 -0400 From: dennis@etinc.com (Dennis) To: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. NT Stability Message-ID: <199608121739.NAA16750@etinc.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>E-mail message from Igor Khasilev contained: >> >> > So my question is: how does NT behave when it has to schedule between a >> > large number of processes each with its own process context, VM, page tables >> > etc? Conversely how does the unix program behave when linked with -lpthreads >> > and with `fork()' replaced with `pthread_create()'? >> >> One bad thing with user level threads (actualy pthreads that I used): >> sheduler which runs on user lever ALWAYS consume processor time (even wnen > >Only when *really* poorly implemented. Otherwise it waits in select(2) to >be awaken by the incoming traffic or that the timeout fires (condition timed >wait, for instance.) When all threads are blocked, no VTALRM's should be >scheduled (I don't know if CAP's pthread implements the last optimization.) This is all very nice, but on a macro level NT has two very obvious problems to consider: 1) Its rather new... 2) It was written by Microsoft Much more significant than the above.... Dennis
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199608121739.NAA16750>