Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 10:39:10 -0600 (MDT) From: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> To: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com>, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, Cedric Berger <cedric@wireless-networks.com>, Arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: KSE threading support (first parts) Message-ID: <15086.59054.668961.132528@nomad.yogotech.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010501122914.5556A-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com> References: <15086.57554.673831.601763@nomad.yogotech.com> <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010501122914.5556A-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > > Sorry is I ask a stupid question, but I'm trying to make sense of this thread. > > > > Here is my question: > > > > - I've a server that runs a single big java application server (one process, > > > > tons of threads like every Java app) > > > > - With the new KSE and friends architecture, will I be able to scale > > > > my app by adding CPUs? > > > > > > Using the linuxthreads port you can do that today > > > using Pthreads today you can not. > > > using the KSE scheme you can > > > > Only if the JVM is compiled using the above technologies. Linuxthreads > > won't be used because the license is incompatible with the JDK license. > > And when we do get KSEs, what's the optimal way to map Java threads > to KSEGs/KSEs? Should each Java thread be a PTHREAD_SCOPE_SYSTEM > thread where each thread gets its own KSEG/KSE pair, or would it > be better to run all threads as PTHREAD_SCOPE_PROCESS in one KSE/KSEG > pair? I believe the latter, but tests would show us which works better for a mix. Nate 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?15086.59054.668961.132528>