libkse -> libpthreads

[Jeff Roberson]

On Mon, 21 Apr 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:

> It wouldn't.  The main issue as far as performance went, and why
> we (Novell USG) used processes instead of SVR4 threads, and did
> file descriptor table sharing, and shared client context data in
> a shared memory segment (8-)) is that SVR4-derived systems without
> a unified VM and buffer cache do a lot of page thrashing.

Please explain how using processes instead of threads improves page
thrashing.

>
> One of the "innovations" in Solaris 9, if you read the white papers,
> is that they reintroduced a seperate buffer cache.  It makes sense
> that in doing that, they would reintroduce the same performance
> problems that came from having a seperate buffer cache in the first
> place.
>
> Probably the correct thing to do instead would have been to introduce
> a seperate working set quota on file objects, so a single file being
> randomly accessed couldn't LRU out all the other files in the system.
> 8-).
>
> -- Terry
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-threads at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-threads-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>