Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
[Caml-list] Why systhreads?
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Damien Doligez <damien.doligez@i...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Why systhreads?
On Monday, Nov 25, 2002, at 23:20 Europe/Paris, Chris Hecker wrote:

> However, HT changes the cost/benefit equation.  How much remains to be 
> seen, of course.

Do you really think so ?  In my experience, 95% of the costs of threads
(with shared memory) are in the debugging (of the threads 
AND of the programs).  Cheap SMP machines and HT do not change the
cost/benefit equation very much.

More important, you don't need threads and shared memory to make use
of a SMP machine.  Any kind of parallelism will do.  Several processes
with message-passing can easily get you 100% load on all your 
Also, message-passing is more general; for example it will work on 

So my opinion is: multiprocessing good, threads bad.

-- Damien

To unsubscribe, mail Archives:
Bug reports: FAQ:
Beginner's list: