* Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [000821 18:01] wrote:
For reference, my recollection is that peemption-aware userland thread
libraries tend to make alot of timer syscalls, losing some of the
advantage of being a userland thread library (low context switch cost, few
transistions
On Mon, 14 Aug 2000, Jonas Bulow wrote:
I'm trying to build a preforked and threaded server. When it comes to
the threading part it seems that non-preemtive threads have a lot of
benefits if the server is a statefull-server.
What I'm trying to say is that the server is not going to do a
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000, Kevin Mills wrote:
This reminds me of coroutines or userland select- or kqueue-based
"threading." Coroutines is a bit more complex but a library is
available.
I've seen the term 'kqueue-based threading' on this list a few times now.
Could you explain what you
I'm trying to build a preforked and threaded server. When it comes to
the threading part it seems that non-preemtive threads have a lot of
benefits if the server is a statefull-server.
What I'm trying to say is that the server is not going to do a lot of
computation for each request. The server
4 matches
Mail list logo
