> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 6:34 AM, erik quanstrom <quans...@quanstro.net> wrote: > > On Tue Mar 24 08:54:12 EDT 2009, rogpe...@gmail.com wrote: > >> http://www.classhat.com/tymaPaulMultithread.pdf > > > > seems more like grist for the task vs. process > > debate. not that the outcome is in doubt. > > except that they only went to 1000 threads. Once we hit more than > that, linux fell over badly for us on even a big machine.
i assume it didn't fall over uniformly. what was the weak point? scheduling? - erik
