comp.lang.ada
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)
Subject: Re: Ada versus Java - Tasking
Date: 1997/01/19
Date: 1997-01-19T00:00:00+00:00	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1997Jan19.122511.1@eisner> (raw)
In-Reply-To: OHK.97Jan19133540@ultra.tfdt-o.nta.no


In article <OHK.97Jan19133540@ultra.tfdt-o.nta.no>, ohk@ultra.tfdt-o.nta.no (Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen FOU.TD/DELAB) writes:

> calls. My tests have been limited to SunOS and HP-UX, but I suspect
> most other thread implementations will give similar results. A POSIX
> thread will be suspended if the device is not ready, ans as you say,
> other threads may run while the suspended thread is waiting. However,
> my tests indicate that while the (blocking) read/write call is
> executed, the whole OS process is suspended. At least, if you have two
> threads doing IO on separate devices, you will not get any overlap of
> those IO operations. In other words, using a native thread package
> does not automagically transform normal blocking read/write calls into
> asynchronous calls, which I find quite reasonable.
> 
> At best, the native threads give very vague promises about the degree
> of real concurrency, so if I have to choose, I would rather have fast
> task switching and handle any blocking system calls myself.

What guarantees are provided vary not only among operating systems but
also among versions of a given operating system.  Alpha VMS, for instance,
has seen dramatic increases in parallelism up through V7.1 which
just arrived this week.  Conventional wisdom is that this was due
in no small part to competition from Windows NT.  VMS was the
first of the three commercial Alpha operating systems to support
multiprocessors and the last to support scheduling of threads
from a single process simultaneously onto those multiple processors.

Operating system developers have a much better chance to make the
scheduling interact with the hardware properly, so I think the better
choices are:

	1) Rely on OS threading support, and wait for improvements.

	2) Lobby the operating system provider for better support,
	   using all methods available, including examples of other
	   operating systems which do it better, either on the same
	   hardware or some other hardware.

Larry Kilgallen




  reply	other threads:[~1997-01-19  0:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
1997-01-16  0:00 Ada versus Java - Tasking Jonas Nygren
1997-01-16  0:00 ` wiljan
1997-01-16  0:00 ` Brad Balfour
1997-01-25  0:00   ` Robert Dewar
1997-01-17  0:00 ` Steve Doiel
1997-01-17  0:00 ` Jeff Carter
1997-01-19  0:00   ` David Taylor
1997-01-20  0:00     ` Jim Hopper
1997-01-20  0:00       ` Michael Paus
1997-01-21  0:00         ` Jim Hopper
1997-01-21  0:00           ` Larry Kilgallen
1997-01-21  0:00             ` jim hopper
1997-01-21  0:00     ` Dr. John B. Matthews
1997-01-23  0:00     ` Jeff Carter
1997-01-18  0:00 ` Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen FOU.TD/DELAB
1997-01-19  0:00   ` Robert A Duff
1997-01-19  0:00 ` Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen FOU.TD/DELAB
1997-01-19  0:00   ` Larry Kilgallen [this message]
1997-01-19  0:00 ` Tom Moran
1997-01-20  0:00 ` Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen FOU.TD/DELAB
1997-01-20  0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1997-01-20  0:00 ` Dale Pontius
1997-01-20  0:00 ` Ada Tasking revisited (was: Re: Ada versus Java - Tasking) Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen FOU.TD/DELAB
1997-01-21  0:00 ` Ada versus Java - Tasking Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen FOU.TD/DELAB
replies disabled

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox