Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 12:19:39 -0800 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Petri Helenius <pete@he.iki.fi> Cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: worker thread performance question Message-ID: <41C09C5B.7060706@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <41C094CB.9010009@he.iki.fi> References: <41C0898E.3090005@he.iki.fi> <41C092EA.7060100@elischer.org> <41C094CB.9010009@he.iki.fi>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Petri Helenius wrote: > Julian Elischer wrote: > >> >> >> Petri Helenius wrote: >> >>> >>> With libpthread is it usually optimal to have as many worker threads >>> (CPU bound stuff) as kern.threads.virtual_cpu or have, say double >>> the number so that there is always a thread in the run queue when >>> another hits a mutex or sleep? >> >> >> >> Are they always runnable? > > > Almost, except when they run into shared structures which obviously > are minimized by design. > >> theoretically you can schedule as many as you want. >> any number > NCPU should keep teh system busy, but >> I'm not sure I fully understand the question. > > > The question was aimed towards if larger runqueue takes more CPU to > maintain than a shorter one does and if threads are involuntarily > switched. yes and yes. > > > Pete > >> >>> >>> >>> Pete >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> freebsd-threads@freebsd.org mailing list >>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads >>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >>> "freebsd-threads-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> >> >> >>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41C09C5B.7060706>