S
s.ross
Poking through the Apple press releases today, I sat up and took
notice when I saw that they were putting a fair amount of pretty
public emphasis on concurrency as the silver bullet for faster
computing when Snow Leopard comes out. If we stipulate that
concurrency is fundamentally a good solution of a certain class of
problems, here were the questions I immediately had:
- My understanding is that the 1.9 implementation of threads is to use
native threads. But the caveat is that the GIL is still in place. What
does this mean in practice as it applies to increasing throughput by
distributing load across processor cores?
- I'm trying to parse the fiber vs. thread distinction and it feels to
me like fibers are a leaner, meaner version of the 1.8.x green
threads, but that they will always run on the same core. Am I missing
something here?
Thanks,
Steve
notice when I saw that they were putting a fair amount of pretty
public emphasis on concurrency as the silver bullet for faster
computing when Snow Leopard comes out. If we stipulate that
concurrency is fundamentally a good solution of a certain class of
problems, here were the questions I immediately had:
- My understanding is that the 1.9 implementation of threads is to use
native threads. But the caveat is that the GIL is still in place. What
does this mean in practice as it applies to increasing throughput by
distributing load across processor cores?
- I'm trying to parse the fiber vs. thread distinction and it feels to
me like fibers are a leaner, meaner version of the 1.8.x green
threads, but that they will always run on the same core. Am I missing
something here?
Thanks,
Steve