Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Howard Chu hyc@symas.com wrote:
then it would be possible to make a direct comparison (against the figures you just sent), against the e.g. 32-threads case. 32 readers, 2 writers. 32 readers, 4 writers. 32 readers, 8 writers and so on. keeping the number of threads (write plus read) to below or equal the total number of cores avoids any unnecessary context-switching
We can do that by running two instances of the benchmark program concurrently; one doing a read-only job with a fixed number of threads (32) and one doing a write-only job with the increasing number of threads.
ohh, ok - great. saves a job doing some programming at least.
This is why it's important to support both multi-process and multi-threaded concurrency ;)