From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 07:29:30 -0700 Message-ID: <13426df10903240729s41bfc3d8i5bf7d5a436da14f@mail.gmail.com> From: ron minnich To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [9fans] grist for the "synchronous vs. asynchronous" mill Topicbox-Message-UUID: c26397a6-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 6:34 AM, erik quanstrom wro= te: > On Tue Mar 24 08:54:12 EDT 2009, rogpeppe@gmail.com wrote: >> http://www.classhat.com/tymaPaulMultithread.pdf > > seems more like grist for the task vs. process > debate. =A0not that the outcome is in doubt. except that they only went to 1000 threads. Once we hit more than that, linux fell over badly for us on even a big machine. I guess the java threads are much better than posix threads? I don't know. I just know that we've had to go back to AIO instead of a posix threads-based tool. ron