From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.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 15:31:21 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3E307B49.9080304@candelatech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030123231913.26663.qmail@mail.com>
Lee Chin wrote:
> Hi
> I am discussing with a few people on different approaches to solving a scale problem I am having, and have gotten vastly different views
>
> In a nutshell, as far as this debate is concerned, I can say I am writing a web server.
>
> Now, to cater to 700 clients, I can
> a) launch 700 threads that each block on I/O to disk and to the client (in reading and writing on the socket)
>
> OR
>
> 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
You could also write something with async non-blocking IO and use NO threads
(ie, just a single process), which
may greatly simplify the debugging of your program (unless the developer(s) on your
project are very good at threaded programming already).
I suspect the async IO will perform better as well, but that is just an
un-founded opinion based on not wanting to think about scheduling 700 processes
that want to do IO :)
>
> Which way will yeild me better performance, considerng both approaches are implemented optimally?
>
> Thanks
> Lee
--
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> <Ben_Greear AT excite.com>
President of Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
ScryMUD: http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-01-23 23:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ 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 23:28 ` Larry McVoy
2003-01-23 23:31 ` Ben Greear [this message]
2003-01-27 9:48 ` Terje Eggestad
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
2003-01-30 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=3E307B49.9080304@candelatech.com \
--to=greearb@candelatech.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox