[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[no subject]
- <!--x-content-type: text/plain -->
- <!--x-date: Sat Mar 27 22:32:41 2004 -->
- <!--x-from-r13: zzvyyfba ng zrevgbayvarflfgrzf.pbz ([vxr [vyyfba) -->
- <!--x-message-id: [email protected] -->
- <!--x-reference: [email protected] -->
- <!--x-reference: [email protected] -->
- <!--x-reference: [email protected]-a-geek.com -->
- <!--x-reference: [email protected] -->
- <!--x-reference: [email protected]-a-geek.com --> "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">
- <!--x-subject: [ale] ps -->
- <li><em>date</em>: Sat Mar 27 22:32:41 2004</li>
- <li><em>from</em>: mmillson at meritonlinesystems.com (Mike Millson)</li>
- <li><em>in-reply-to</em>: <<a href="msg01023.html">[email protected]</a>></li>
- <li><em>references</em>: <<a href="msg01004.html">[email protected]</a>> <<a href="msg01006.html">[email protected]</a>> <<a href="msg01019.html">[email protected]</a>> <<a href="msg01022.html">[email protected]</a>> <<a href="msg01023.html">[email protected]</a>></li>
- <li><em>subject</em>: [ale] ps</li>
On Sat, 2004-03-27 at 20:07, Bjorn Dittmer-Roche wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Mar 2004, David Corbin wrote:
>
> >
> > > Keep in mind that default RH and Debian kernels treat threads differently.
> > > Debain uses the old threading model which gives each thread it's own entry
> > > in the process table. RH uses NPTL, wich does not give each thread it's
> > > own entry and, thus, requires less overhead, so what you are seeing is
> > > probably a reflection of the Kernels' threading models _not_ a diffetence
> > > in ps. If you want the new behaviour on Debian, I recomend upgrading your
> > > kernel to a 2.6 series which will also improve your performance.
> >
> > Not too sure I'm ready to jump on the 2.6 bandwagon. Is NPTL in 2.4,
>
> By default, NPTL is not in 2.4, but redhat has backported it. It may be in
> some of the very latest 2.4's though, I'm not sure.
>
> > and how how does it stack up against "the old threading model"?
>
> The new threading model is much higher performance. I am told you will
> notice the difference in any heavilly threaded application. Java is a good
> example.
>
> bjorn
</pre>
<!--X-Body-of-Message-End-->
<!--X-MsgBody-End-->
<!--X-Follow-Ups-->
<hr>
<!--X-Follow-Ups-End-->
<!--X-References-->
<ul><li><strong>References</strong>:
<ul>
<li><strong><a name="01004" href="msg01004.html">[ale] ps</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> dcorbin at machturtle.com (David Corbin)</li></ul></li>
<li><strong><a name="01006" href="msg01006.html">[ale] ps</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> Robert.L.Harris at rdlg.net (Robert L. Harris)</li></ul></li>
<li><strong><a name="01019" href="msg01019.html">[ale] ps</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> bjorn at sccs.swarthmore.edu (Bjorn Dittmer-Roche)</li></ul></li>
<li><strong><a name="01022" href="msg01022.html">[ale] ps</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> dcorbin at machturtle.com (David Corbin)</li></ul></li>
<li><strong><a name="01023" href="msg01023.html">[ale] ps</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> bjorn at sccs.swarthmore.edu (Bjorn Dittmer-Roche)</li></ul></li>
</ul></li></ul>
<!--X-References-End-->
<!--X-BotPNI-->
<ul>
<li>Prev by Date:
<strong><a href="msg01025.html">[ale] OT : SpamAssassin becoming inefective</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Next by Date:
<strong><a href="msg01026.html">[ale] USB/802.11 experience</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Previous by thread:
<strong><a href="msg01023.html">[ale] ps</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Next by thread:
<strong><a href="msg01005.html">[ale] UPS battery replacment</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Index(es):
<ul>
<li><a href="maillist.html#01024"><strong>Date</strong></a></li>
<li><a href="threads.html#01024"><strong>Thread</strong></a></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<!--X-BotPNI-End-->
<!--X-User-Footer-->
<!--X-User-Footer-End-->
</body>
</html>