Weightless threads?


(Radu M. Obadã) #1

I was reading through IBM Developer Works newsletter today, and I came
agains something very interesting: weightless threads. This is mentioned
in the Python column. They say that they incur virtually no overhead,
and that one could run a large number of them even on a mediocre
machine. I was wondering, has anybody had any experience with those? If
so, when we will see such things in Ruby?
Regards,
Radu

This e-mail was scanned by RAV AntiVirus!

···

Xnet scaneaza automat toate mesajele impotriva virusilor folosind RAV AntiVirus.
Xnet automatically scans all messages for viruses using RAV AntiVirus.

Nota: RAV AntiVirus poate sa nu detecteze toti virusii noi sau toate variantele lor. Va rugam sa luati in considerare ca exista un risc de fiecare data cand deschideti fisiere atasate si ca MobiFon nu este responsabila pentru nici un prejudiciu cauzat de virusi.
Disclaimer: RAV AntiVirus may not be able to detect all new viruses and variants. Please be aware that there is a risk involved whenever opening e-mail attachments to your computer and that MobiFon is not responsible for any damages caused by viruses.


(Ned Konz) #2

Sure; Squeak (Smalltalk) has very lightweight threads. People have had
upwards of 10000 threads with no problems.

It’s a very simple architecture: there is a queue of ready-to-run
processes at each priority level. And Semaphores keep lists of
waiting processes, as well.

There is just enough VM support to do the actual process switch.

···

On Thursday 06 June 2002 12:29 pm, Radu M. Obadã wrote:

I was reading through IBM Developer Works newsletter today, and I
came agains something very interesting: weightless threads. This is
mentioned in the Python column. They say that they incur virtually
no overhead, and that one could run a large number of them even on
a mediocre machine. I was wondering, has anybody had any experience
with those?


Ned Konz
http://bike-nomad.com
GPG key ID: BEEA7EFE