From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Tasking Techniques - Opinions?
Date: 1997/06/07
Date: 1997-06-07T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dewar.865692193@merv> (raw)
In-Reply-To: JSA.97Jun5140920@alexandria.organon.com
Jon says
<<> Absolutely true. However, do be aware that protected types have
> significant overhead -- not as much as task rendezvous, but on the
> order of ten times a procedure call.
I find this surprising. On what do you base this 10X figure?
>>
surprisingly low? or suprisingly high? The difference will vary widely. If
taking the necessary lock requires a kernel call, as it does when running
over some OS's, then the factor of 10 will be wildly optimistic. Protected
types were designed to be efficient on bare hardware, their implementation
over operating stystems is often disappointingly inefficient.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1997-06-07 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1997-06-04 0:00 Tasking Techniques - Opinions? Steve Doiel
1997-06-03 0:00 ` Tom Moran
1997-06-07 0:00 ` Steve Doiel
1997-06-04 0:00 ` bsanden
1997-06-04 0:00 ` Samuel A. Mize
1997-06-05 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1997-06-06 0:00 ` Samuel A. Mize
1997-06-07 0:00 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
1997-06-10 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1997-06-04 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1997-06-05 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox