On Saturday 13 March 2004 11:45 am, Andy Sy wrote: > "Process creation has much lower overhead under Unix than it does > under Win32. However, thread creation in Win32 is much cheaper than > either. It is not unreasonable for a single processor Windows NT > machine to have 500 threads. most Unix machines would have serious > porformance problems with 500 processes, even if most of them were > not active." > > Are Linux processes more efficient than traditional Unix ones? > Roughly how many processes max. could Linux on, say, a 256MB > Pentium III - 700Mhz machine be able to handle?
Orly Andico has already replied. I might point out though that the quote has to do with "overhead of process creation", not the overhead of actually running all those processes at the same time. Before, i think, kernel version 2.4, linux threads were mapped to processes. in 2.4 (or maybe it's in 2.5, 2.6), threads are now no longer mapped to processes and are now much more efficient (this i get only from readings, i don't have time yet to install 2.6 on a spare box and then run benchmarks, fun though that would be :). tiger -- Gerald Timothy Quimpo gquimpo*hotmail.com tiger*sni*ph http://bopolissimus.sni.ph Public Key: "gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 672F4C78" include/asm-sparc/solerrno.h:#define SOL_ENETDOWN 127 /* Your subnet is on fire */ /usr/src/linux/include/asm-sparc/solerrno.h -- Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Official Website: http://plug.linux.org.ph Searchable Archives: http://marc.free.net.ph . To leave, go to http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/plug . Are you a Linux newbie? To join the newbie list, go to http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/ph-linux-newbie
