From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <4b8dd12d15270ed16ef4d4a96e4df34a@coraid.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] procreate vs threadcreate?
From: Brantley Coile <brantley@coraid.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 15:58:25 -0400
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.61.0508231550420.6232@cps210>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 7bb33cac-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

Both share address space, but proccreate creates another process.
This process can block on doing IO or some other system call that will
block the progress of the process.  Threads are co-routines in a
single process.  None of them will run if the process blocks on, say,
a read.  So, proccreate processes to do the IO and have them use
channels to send messages to worker threads.

Sape has a good paper on all this, as is Rob's paper on Newsqueak.

> I need some help in understnading the difference
> between proccreate() and threadcreate(). What
> are the scenario where usage of one is better than
> the other?
> 
> -ishwar