From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id NAA03750; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:08:17 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA03177 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:08:15 +0100 (MET) X-SPAM-Warning: Sending machine is listed in blackholes.five-ten-sg.com Received: from eposta.kablonet.com.tr ([62.248.102.66]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id hAKC8B129163 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:08:13 +0100 (MET) Received: (qmail 39602 invoked by uid 0); 20 Nov 2003 12:13:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO 195.174.173.82) (exa@kablonet.com.tr@195.174.173.82) by 0 with SMTP; 20 Nov 2003 12:13:39 -0000 From: Eray Ozkural Reply-To: erayo@cs.bilkent.edu.tr Organization: Bilkent University CS Dept. To: Caml Mailing List Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Need advice for a mobile application server Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 14:08:06 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.93 References: <200311192003.37039.exa@kablonet.com.tr> <20031120091315.GA23449@redhat.com> <20031120102727.A28533@pauillac.inria.fr> In-Reply-To: <20031120102727.A28533@pauillac.inria.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200311201408.06069.exa@kablonet.com.tr> X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; eray:01 ozkural:01 caml-list:01 posix:01 quirks:01 posix:01 threads:01 implemented:01 quirks:01 incompatible:01 threads:01 eray:01 ozkural:01 erayo:01 bilkent:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Hello Xavier, On Thursday 20 November 2003 11:27, Xavier Leroy wrote: > You can safely say LinuxThreads is slightly borken, in that lack of > thread support in the Linux kernel (until recently) prevented full > compliance with the POSIX standard. These quirks affected some fairly > obscure corners of the POSIX spec, though. In particular, the earlier > comment that "LinuxThreads creates all threads detached" is not > accurate: thread creation and joining was implemented correctly. > I suppose. I bet I have seen some strange quirks which somehow made a thread wrapper library in C++ I had written incompatible across linux and solaris. I guess I had thought Solaris kernel got it right, but I ended up not having understood the reasons, at least not from the user documentation. > Back to the original question: writing a multithreaded server in OCaml > is definitely feasible. The only limitation to be aware of is that > OCaml threads do not offer parallelism, just concurrent execution. > What this means is that if there are several processors on your > machine, only one can execute OCaml code at any time, but other > threads (and therefore possibly other processors) can do I/O or C > computations in parallel. Thanks for the info. I couldn't quite figure out why only one proc. can execute ocaml code yet, but I can dig into the documentation :) Regards, -- Eray Ozkural (exa) Comp. Sci. Dept., Bilkent University, Ankara KDE Project: http://www.kde.org www: http://www.cs.bilkent.edu.tr/~erayo Malfunction: http://mp3.com/ariza GPG public key fingerprint: 360C 852F 88B0 A745 F31B EA0F 7C07 AE16 874D 539C ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners