----------------------------------------------------------------
BEFORE YOU POST, search the faq at <http://java.apache.org/faq/>
WHEN YOU POST, include all relevant version numbers, log files,
and configuration files. Don't make us guess your problem!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Glen !
How did you manage to get IBM's JDK working with Apache JServ ? I thought
there were problems with it, specifically the CLASSPATH ? Any docs or
HOWTO's you can suggest ? There are a couple of us on the Caldera mailing
list who would really want to know...
Thanks and Regards,
Pascal Chong
-----Original Message-----
From: Glen Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, November 03, 1999 6:32 AM
Subject: Re: ibm 118 vs. blackdown 117_v3
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>BEFORE YOU POST, search the faq at <http://java.apache.org/faq/>
>WHEN YOU POST, include all relevant version numbers, log files,
>and configuration files. Don't make us guess your problem!!!
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>Michael Amster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Yes, it's called threads. IBM's jdk118 is native threaded only - not
green
>> threads. Because of this you will see one "process" in the process table
>> for each native thread. This is an artifact of how Linux does native
>> threading. In reality there is only one process with only one memory
>> footprint for all the threads listed in ps.
>>
>> -MA
>
>Which are faster/less overhead/better : green threads or native threads?
>
>Sorry if this seems off-track:
>
>Is this correct? "Only an artifact" and "only one memory footprint"? I
>thought linux had 1 process per thread, and are kernal threads. I know
>that Linus sees a thread as a "context of execution" (COE), don't tell me
>that clone() doesn't give you something more heavy weight than Solaris
>threads? Even if Linux has nimble process context switching (which it
>does), Solaris threads were literally designed to have thousands of
>thread floating around! More complex, having kernal threads (lwp's)
>and user threads. IMHO Linux threads will not scale this way, but I am
>no expert.
>
>Is someone out there more knowledgable and fairly "objective" comment
>on this. No flame wars please: I am a 24/7 Linux user and
>developer. Let's be honest about what Linux doesn't do well so we can
>1) improve it; and 2) not claim things that is doesn't do well so the
>bad guys can hammer us...
>
>Some URL is ran into thinking of this:
>http://www.cs.cf.ac.uk/Dave/C/node29.html#SECTION002910000000000000000
>http://www.prenhall.com/books/ptr_0134436989.html
>http://www.lambdacs.com/newsgroup/FAQ.html
>http://www.sun.com/workshop/threads/
>http://www.sun.com/workshop/threads/internet.html
>
>-GN
>
>
>
>
>--
>--------------------------------------------------------------
>Please read the FAQ! <http://java.apache.org/faq/>
>To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Archives and Other: <http://java.apache.org/main/mail.html>
>Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Please read the FAQ! <http://java.apache.org/faq/>
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives and Other: <http://java.apache.org/main/mail.html>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
