Josiah Carlson <jcarlson at uci.edu> wrote: > > It would be convenient, yes, but the question isn't always 'threads or > processes?' In my experience (not to say that it is more or better than > anyone else's), when going multi-process, the expense on some platforms > is significant enough to want to persist the process (this is counter to > my previous forking statement, but its all relative). And sometimes one > *wants* multiple threads running in a single process handling multiple > requests. Yes, indeed. This is all confused by the way that POSIX (and Microsoft) threads have become essentially just processes with shared resources. If one had a system with real, lightweight threads, the same might well not be so. Regards, Nick Maclaren, University of Cambridge Computing Service, New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QH, England. Email: nmm1 at cam.ac.uk Tel.: +44 1223 334761 Fax: +44 1223 334679
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4