Re: threads or processes?
Re: threads or processes?
- Subject: Re: threads or processes?
- From: Daniel Jalkut <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 20:15:20 -0500
Well, I regularly run more than 100 processes on my PowerMac G5 2.0Ghz.
And the new Intel macs are supposed to be about a bajillion or 2
bajillion times faster than that, so I hear.
Free the processes!
Daniel
On Jan 29, 2006, at 7:44 PM, Michael Rothwell wrote:
On Jan 28, 2006, at 11:25 AM, John Stiles wrote:
At any rate, I agree that one process per connection is expensive.
However, it's what Apache used to do IIRC (and maybe still does, I
don't know), so it can't be /that/ awful.
A machine running Apache with >100 child processes is probably a
busy dedicated webserver, not some guy's desktop running an
application.
Look at using CFSockets added to the runloop.
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden