From: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>
To: Lee Chin <leechin@mail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-newbie@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: debate on 700 threads vs asynchronous code
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 15:28:34 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030123232834.GA17554@work.bitmover.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030123231913.26663.qmail@mail.com>
> b) Write an asycnhrounous system with only 2 or three threads where I manage the connections and stack (via setcontext swapcontext etc), which is progromatically a little harder
>
> Which way will yeild me better performance, considerng both approaches are implemented optimally?
If this is a serious question, an async system will by definition do better.
You have either 700 stacks screwing up the data cache or 2-3 stacks nicely
fitting in the data cache. Ditto for instruction cache, etc.
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-01-23 23:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-01-23 23:19 debate on 700 threads vs asynchronous code Lee Chin
2003-01-23 23:19 ` Lee Chin
2003-01-23 23:28 ` Larry McVoy [this message]
2003-01-23 23:31 ` Ben Greear
2003-01-23 23:31 ` Ben Greear
2003-01-27 9:48 ` Terje Eggestad
2003-01-27 21:48 ` Bill Davidsen
2003-01-27 21:48 ` Bill Davidsen
2003-01-27 22:08 ` Bill Davidsen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-01-24 0:07 Lee Chin
2003-01-24 1:46 Dan Kegel
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.44.0301232028480.980-100000@coffee.psychology.mcmaster.ca>
2003-01-24 2:04 ` Dan Kegel
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.44.0301232144470.8203-100000@coffee.psychology.mcmaster.ca>
2003-01-24 8:21 ` Dan Kegel
2003-01-24 8:26 ` Mark Mielke
2003-01-24 22:53 ` Corey Minyard
2003-01-24 23:21 ` Matti Aarnio
2003-01-24 23:29 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-25 0:11 ` Dan Kegel
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.44.0301241840450.11758-100000@coffee.psychology.mcmaster.ca>
2003-01-25 0:24 ` Dan Kegel
2003-01-29 17:26 Lee Chin
2003-01-29 17:26 ` Lee Chin
2003-01-30 9:36 ` Terje Eggestad
2003-01-30 9:36 ` Terje Eggestad
2003-01-29 21:32 Dan Kegel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20030123232834.GA17554@work.bitmover.com \
--to=lm@bitmover.com \
--cc=leechin@mail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-newbie@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.