From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id QAA10505; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 16:02:42 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA10482 for ; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 16:02:41 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f6KE21b23749; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 16:02:01 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from xleroy@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id QAA10480; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 16:01:56 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 16:01:56 +0200 From: Xavier Leroy To: "Alexander V. Voinov" Cc: Mattias Waldau , Caml list Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Will Ocaml use a 4-way SMP box without splitting the program into separate processes? Message-ID: <20010720160156.H9351@pauillac.inria.fr> References: <20010715133250.B4478@pauillac.inria.fr> <3B539C0A.B8FA83A@quasar.ipa.nw.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: <3B539C0A.B8FA83A@quasar.ipa.nw.ru>; from avv@quasar.ipa.nw.ru on Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 06:59:38PM -0700 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk > > > Doesn't this mean that a process can never use more than one processor? > > > > Yes, if the process is entirely composed of Caml code. Long-running C > > primitives release the lock, meaning that your 4-processor machine can > > have 1 processor running Caml code and 3 executing C primitives, > > e.g. database queries. > > Is this true for both native and bytecode? Yes. The GC and many parts of the runtime system common to both compilers are not thread-safe. - Xavier Leroy ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr