Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 07:46:22 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> To: dcs@newsguy.com, eischen@vigrid.com Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Threads goals version II Message-ID: <199911011246.HAA13624@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Some people (most people on the FreeBSD campus who have been > involved with threads, it would seem) think that having more threads > for the purpose of increasing your time slice is bad behavior, to > say the least. Unix have a mechanism to adjust the relative priority > between processes, which is called priority. If a process is > supposed to eat more cpu time than others, it is given a lower > priority than the others. An application can fork just as well as create threads. You're not stopping anything here. > Having a programmer get around the admin mechanism to adjust process > priority through use of threads might led to a situation where > competing users end up bogging down the whole system while fighting > for cpu time. Again, what's the difference between fork and creating a thread with a new LWP? Count LWPs along with processes and keep it within the limits of maxproc. > Anyway, this is the "contention" point that has been mentioned. Many > people here _want_ all processes to be equal, no matter how many > threads they run. Instead of trying to convince people to see the > light, just ask that your dissent be noted, or that both > capabilities be present. Consider this notification. Dan Eischen eischen@vigrid.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199911011246.HAA13624>