From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a5681531ca1cf09e
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Tom Moran <tmoran@bix.com>
Subject: Re: Tasking performance between Ada83 and Ada95
Date: 1997/06/15
Message-ID: <33A4B46A.4010@bix.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 248741197
References: <1997Jun6.115223.7384@relay.nswc.navy.mil> <dewar.865693453@merv>
  <7h6UFCAdNsmzEwg3@walsh.demon.co.uk> <dewar.865870961@merv>
 <Db0ccBASt4ozEwUo@walsh.demon.co.uk> <dewar.866376446@merv>
Organization: InterNex Information Services 1-800-595-3333
Reply-To: tmoran@bix.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-06-15T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


> Note that on the SGI implementation of GNAT, there are controls ovre how
> tasks are distributed among processes, and it is worth while tuning these
> right
  Some years ago at a local (SF Bay Area) SIGADA meeting the speaker
discussed a system where you could map N Ada tasks to M threads. It was
probably on a Sun, but I could misremember.