Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com>
>> 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
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/