[Home] [Groups] - Message: [Prev in Group] [Next in Group]
19557: Re: [MUD-Dev] Re: TECH: Distributed Muds
[Full Header] [Plain Text]
From: Vincent Archer <archer@nevrax.com>
Newsgroups: nu.kanga.list.mud-dev
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 09:47:52 +0200
References: [1] [2] <-newest
Organization: Kanga.Nu
According to Jon Lambert:
> Due to the cost of a context switch under Linux, the optimum number
> of threads = the number of CPUs in the box (assuming all threads are
> busy etc...etc).
Due to the cost of a context switch under QNX, the optimum number of
threads is whatever your memory can support (56 instruction cycles for
a full context switch, if I remember right).
Of course, QNX is built with real-time objectives, not as a true
multipurpose operating systems. Even with the posix layers.
QNX might be well suited to a large distributed MUD, however, seeing
as it has everything built around message passing between threads that
might be located on the same CPU, a different CPU, or even a CPU
located at the other end of a network trunk 100km away. When you're
talking about distributed, real-time systems, QNX comes to mind.
--
Vincent Archer Email: archer@nevrax.com
Nevrax France. Off on the yellow brick road we go!
_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev@kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev