Aaron Denney wrote: > On 2008-09-17, Jonathan Cast <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> In my mind pooling vs new-creation is only relevant to process vs >>> thread in the performance aspects. >> >> Say what? This discussion is entirely about performance --- does >> CPython actually have the ability to scale concurrent programs to >> multiple processors? The only reason you would ever want to do that is >> for performance. > > I entered the discussion as which model is a workaround for the other -- > someone said processes were a workaround for the lack of good threading > in e.g. standard CPython. I replied that most languages thread support > can be seen as a workaround for the poor performance of communicating > processes. (creation in particular is usually cited, but that cost can > often be reduced by process pools, context switching costs, alas, is > harder.) > >> Kernel threads /are/ expensive. Which is why all the cool kids use >> user-space threads.
You must love Coyotos, then (http://www.coyotos.org/), which (IIRC) allows just that (via so called 'scheduler activations', see http://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/bershad/Papers/p53-anderson.pdf) Cheers Ben _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
