From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5544BC57 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 13:47:46 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ArcFAIsM4kxQW+UMgWdsb2JhbACUX44AFQEBFiIivkyFSwSKWIZl X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,206,1288566000"; d="scan'208";a="87270539" Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 16 Nov 2010 13:47:25 +0100 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PIKwX-0001AX-4N for caml-list@inria.fr; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 13:47:25 +0100 Received: from avelizy-155-1-94-54.w90-35.abo.wanadoo.fr ([90.35.89.54]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 13:47:25 +0100 Received: from sylvain by avelizy-155-1-94-54.w90-35.abo.wanadoo.fr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 13:47:25 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: caml-list@inria.fr From: Sylvain Le Gall Subject: Re: SMP multithreading Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 12:47:13 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20101115182737.42b8dcae@loki.yggdrasil.draxit.de> X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: avelizy-155-1-94-54.w90-35.abo.wanadoo.fr User-Agent: slrn/pre1.0.0-18 (Linux) X-Spam: no; 0.00; le-gall:01 speedups:01 ocaml:01 runtime:01 ocaml:01 camlp:01 jocaml:01 jocaml:01 ocamlmpi:01 ocamlmpi:01 maillist:98 acb:98 15.:98 1.5:98 wrote:01 Hi, On 15-11-2010, Wolfgang Draxinger wrote: > Hi, > > I've just read > http://caml.inria.fr/pub/ml-archives/caml-list/2002/11/64c14acb90cb14bedb2cacb73338fb15.en.html > in particular this paragraph: >| What about hyperthreading? Well, I believe it's the last convulsive >| movement of SMP's corpse :-) We'll see how it goes market-wise. At >| any rate, the speedups announced for hyperthreading in the Pentium 4 >| are below a factor of 1.5; probably not enough to offset the overhead >| of making the OCaml runtime system thread-safe. > > This reads just like the "640k ought be enough for everyone". Multicore > systems are the standard today. Even the cheapest consumer machines > come with at least two cores. Once can easily get 6 core machines today. > > Still thinking SMP was a niche and was dying? > Hyperthreading was never remarkable about performance or whatever and is probably not pure SMP (emulated SMP maybe?). > So, what're the developments regarding SMP multithreading OCaml? > There are various development regarding this subject (most recent first): - Plasma (MapReduce in OCaml) http://plasma.camlcity.org/plasma/index.html - OC4MC (OCaml for MultiCore) http://www.algo-prog.info/ocmc/web/ - ocamlp3l http://camlp3l.inria.fr/eng.htm - jocaml http://jocaml.inria.fr/ - ocamlmpi http://forge.ocamlcore.org/projects/ocamlmpi/ All these projects try to tackle the challenge of SMP from different point of view. Maybe you'll find what your answer in one of them. Regards, Sylvain Le Gall