NGPT - Next Generation POSIX Threading
NGPT Release 2.2.0, released today, 10 January 2003, is the next release
of the "Next Generation"
of Linux pthreads support. This release is fully suitable as a replacement
for LinuxThreads by either
a single user or group or an entire distribution.
In this release, the primary focus was performance. Significant
performance and scalability enhance-
ments have been made to this release making it the fastest and most
scalable POSIX compliant
threads package available on the Linux platform.
In this release, performance and scalability were the key focus of NGPT
developers.? Performance and scalability were improved to the point where
NGPT bests both LinuxThreads and the new NPTL threading package in
benchmarks.? No changes were made to the kernel patches and thanks to the
NPTL effort, all changes required to run NGPT on the latest 2.5.x kernels
are already included.
Performance and scalability were measured using a benchmark program
developed by Sun Microsystems to "prove" that a 1:1 threading model is
better than the M:N threading model.? As can be seen in the benchmark
results NGPT is the performance and scalability leader on both a 2-way and
4-way machine running this benchmark.? The benchmark results can be found
on the NGPT website. The benchmark itself can be downloaded from the Sun
Microsystems site.
The NGPT website can be found at
http://www-126.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/pthreads.
On Friday 10 January 2003 20:58, Bill Abt wrote:
Hi Bill,
> In this release, the primary focus was performance. Significant
> performance and scalability enhance-
> ments have been made to this release making it the fastest and most
> scalable POSIX compliant
> threads package available on the Linux platform.
hmm, can this be true?
>From the website: http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/pthreads/
"Linus Torvalds: Look at Next Generation POSIX Threads (NGPT) for the future"
"of threads, he advised. "pthreads are horrible, and Linux has a very"
"different model, and there was no glue between the two." NGPT could be that"
"glue."
_when_ did Linus say that? :)
> NGPT Release 2.2.0 is a point release of the "Next Generation" of Linux
> pthreads support.
> This release is fully suitable as a replacement for LinuxThreads by either a
> single user or group or and entire distribution.
so, KDE works now but instead you made mozilla, xmms and galeon gone to death
;)
ciao, Marc
Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
>On Friday 10 January 2003 20:58, Bill Abt wrote:
>
>Hi Bill,
>
>
>
>>In this release, the primary focus was performance. Significant
>>performance and scalability enhance-
>>ments have been made to this release making it the fastest and most
>>scalable POSIX compliant
>>threads package available on the Linux platform.
>>
>>
>hmm, can this be true?
>
The benchmarks are likely an accurate, good faith
measurement of the stated systems, and ngpt is
obviously an improvement over the old linuxthreads -
But according to my understanding, a more accurate
measure of nptl performance would require a current
glibc, with the nptl-specific enhancements -
or am I missing something here?
Joe
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 05:26:47PM -0800, jjs wrote:
> But according to my understanding, a more accurate
> measure of nptl performance would require a current
> glibc, with the nptl-specific enhancements -
>
> or am I missing something here?
You are correct: you need a recent 2.5 kernel and a recent glibc.
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 08:41:09PM -0500, [email protected] wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 20:33:46 EST, Jeff Garzik said:
> > You are correct: you need a recent 2.5 kernel and a recent glibc.
> I'll bite - how recent a glibc? Does the 2.3.1 RPM that RedHat included
> on the Phoebe beta qualify, or do we need even more bleeding-edge?
AFAIK, yes, it was included in the Phoebe beta.
However, I also pretty sure that fixes have been made since then, so I
would grab the latest glibc from cvs... This is unfortunately a better
question for the glibc lists ;-)
Jeff
On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 20:33:46 EST, Jeff Garzik said:
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 05:26:47PM -0800, jjs wrote:
> > But according to my understanding, a more accurate
> > measure of nptl performance would require a current
> > glibc, with the nptl-specific enhancements -
> >
> > or am I missing something here?
>
> You are correct: you need a recent 2.5 kernel and a recent glibc.
I'll bite - how recent a glibc? Does the 2.3.1 RPM that RedHat included
on the Phoebe beta qualify, or do we need even more bleeding-edge?
[email protected] wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 20:33:46 EST, Jeff Garzik said:
>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 05:26:47PM -0800, jjs wrote:
>> > But according to my understanding, a more accurate
>> > measure of nptl performance would require a current
>> > glibc, with the nptl-specific enhancements -
>> >
>> > or am I missing something here?
>>
>> You are correct: you need a recent 2.5 kernel and a recent glibc.
>
> I'll bite - how recent a glibc? Does the 2.3.1 RPM that RedHat included
> on the Phoebe beta qualify, or do we need even more bleeding-edge?
https://listman.redhat.com/pipermail/phil-list/2003-January/000413.html
lists what sources are needed for the latest nptl.
Phoebe beta had a slightly earlier snapshot of nptl and glibc.
As far as the kernel goes, it's rumored
( https://listman.redhat.com/pipermail/phil-list/2003-January/000419.html )
that you're better off using a recent 2.5 kernel than the 2.4 backport
in phoebe.
I haven't tried NPTL myself, though, so what do I know...
- Dan
--
Dan Kegel
Linux User #78045
http://www.kegel.com