Re: threads or processes?
Re: threads or processes?
- Subject: Re: threads or processes?
- From: Daniel Jalkut <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:14:02 -0500
On Jan 29, 2006, at 8:58 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
The fact that you have any number of processes running does not
contribute to whether it is more performant to use processes,
threads or
run loops. Having 100 threads running within one process will likely
still be faster on both PPC and Intel! It eliminates some overhead for
the OS and processor when switching between them, as a process has an
address space of its own whereas a thread does not ("lightweight
process"), only some associated context information I believe.
Very true - but so does not running your program. So I say, do
whatever makes most sense. Not running Photoshop also reduces the
load on your processor.
My point was that, to the extent that any of this argument can be
reduced to "Apple only lets us run 100 processes," it's ridiculous
and Apple should change the default limit. Especially in the wake of
new machines being released that are ostensibly 2-5 times faster
than the existing "top of the line," we shouldn't be designing future
applications with a 100 process system limit in mind.
Daniel
_______________________________________________
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