Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 19:51:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Tani Hosokawa <unknown@riverstyx.net> To: David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: Known MMAP() race conditions ... ? Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9907141948260.2405-100000@avarice.riverstyx.net> In-Reply-To: <000201bece6c$79350420$021d85d1@youwant.to>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 14 Jul 1999, David Schwartz wrote: > > On Thu, 15 Jul 1999, Terry Lambert wrote: > > > > > > Applications requiring large numbers of threads. > > > Balk. "Rodents of unusual size? I don't believe they exist...". > > > > BTW, what would you consider to be a large number of threads? 64? 128? > > More? How about a threaded webserver? Apache *is* going to be threaded, > > you know... > > I would hope that no matter how much Apache is threaded, it doesn't use a > 'one thread per request' model. The cases where you honestly do require > large numbers of threads (like 300 plus) are very rare. > > In every such case I've ever seen, it was theoretically possible to 'code > your way out' of the need for that number of threads. The problem is that > sometimes it's more effort than it's worth. The current model is a hybrid thread/process model, with a number of processes each with a large number of threads in each, each thread processing one request. From what I've seen, 64 threads/process is about right. So, in one Apache daemon, you can expect to see >1000 threads, running inside 10-20 processes. Does that count as a large number? --- tani hosokawa river styx internet To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.10.9907141948260.2405-100000>