Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 20 Sep 2002 11:49:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 20 Sep 2002 11:49:34 -0400 Received: from tmr-02.dsl.thebiz.net ([216.238.38.204]:9235 "EHLO gatekeeper.tmr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 20 Sep 2002 11:49:33 -0400 Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 11:47:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Davidsen To: Ingo Molnar cc: linux-kernel Subject: Re: 100,000 threads? [was: [ANNOUNCE] Native POSIX Thread Library 0.1] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1137 Lines: 27 On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Ingo Molnar wrote: > the extreme high-end of threading typically uses very controlled > applications and very small user level stacks. > > as to the question of why so many threads, the answer is because we can :) > This, besides demonstrating some of the recent scalability advances, gives > us the warm fuzzy feeling that things are right in this area. I mean, > there are architectures where Linux could map a petabyte of RAM just fine, > even though that might not be something we desperately need today. I think testing at these high numbers is a good proof of scalability, although response and stability are also important. Before I went to NGPT I had a fair bit of problem with learning experiences after threads got beyond 200 or so. -- bill davidsen CTO, TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/