On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 2:22 PM Chris Hopkins <cbehopk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> .... The microsecond or so of cost you see I understood was *not* due to > there being thousands of operations needed to run the channel, but the > latency added by the stall, and scheduler overhead. > One particular case, which many benchmarks end up doing is that they run a single operation through the system which in turn pays all the context switching overhead for that operation. But channels pipeline. If you start running a million operations, then the switching overhead amortizes over the operations if your system is correctly asynchronous and tuned. I think most message passing languages add some kind of atomics in order to track counters and like stuff without resorting to sending around microscopic messages all the time. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
