From: Francois Berenger <berenger@riken.jp>
To: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Thread behaviour
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 20:52:19 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <524C08F3.2090500@riken.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOg1smC8pJt=o4y1Ben6N+FkDNqOgMSWm1iXQZdqaaBrFENCLw@mail.gmail.com>
On 10/2/13 7:37 PM, Wojciech Meyer wrote:
> Agreed here, but it does not preclude of using very lightweight
> alternative based on system threads like parmap
Just for the record, Parmap is fork-based, not thread-based.
> or functory for the
> parts have a high degree of parallerism. (and of course only if your
> program allows to do this)
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 6:01 AM, Pierre Chambart
> <pierre.chambart@laposte.net <mailto:pierre.chambart@laposte.net>> wrote:
>
> On 30/09/2013 05:18, Xavier Leroy wrote:
> > On 2013-09-27 12:10, Tom Ridge wrote:
> >> I have a little program which creates a thread, and then sits in
> a loop:
> >> [...]
> >> When I run the program I get the output:
> >>
> >> 1
> >> 2
> >>
> >> and the program then sits in the loop.
> > It all depends on the whim of the OS scheduler. OCaml has no control
> > over it. And you shoudn't expect any kind of fairness from the OS
> > scheduler, esp. Linux's, which gladly jettisons any pretense of
> > fairness in the hope of getting better throughput.
> Usualy, the scheduler is fair when you force all threads to run on the
> same processor.
> But I would still prefer the LWT way for doing message passing.
> --
> Pierre
>
> --
> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives:
> https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-02 11:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-27 10:10 Tom Ridge
2013-09-27 10:22 ` Simon Cruanes
2013-09-27 10:27 ` Romain Bardou
2013-09-27 10:51 ` Benedikt Grundmann
2013-09-28 19:09 ` Tom Ridge
2013-09-29 7:54 ` Tom Ridge
2013-09-29 12:37 ` Yaron Minsky
2013-09-29 16:25 ` Tom Ridge
2013-09-29 16:46 ` Chet Murthy
2013-09-29 17:18 ` Tom Ridge
2013-09-29 17:47 ` Chet Murthy
2013-09-30 8:24 ` Romain Bardou
2013-10-07 14:57 ` Goswin von Brederlow
2013-09-30 8:16 ` Romain Bardou
2013-10-01 3:32 ` Ivan Gotovchits
2013-10-07 14:49 ` Goswin von Brederlow
2013-09-30 9:18 ` Xavier Leroy
2013-09-30 15:12 ` Tom Ridge
2013-09-30 16:01 ` Török Edwin
2013-09-30 16:56 ` Gabriel Kerneis
2013-09-30 18:18 ` Alain Frisch
2013-10-01 5:01 ` Pierre Chambart
2013-10-01 7:21 ` Gabriel Kerneis
2013-10-02 10:37 ` Wojciech Meyer
2013-10-02 11:52 ` Francois Berenger [this message]
2013-10-02 11:58 ` Wojciech Meyer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=524C08F3.2090500@riken.jp \
--to=berenger@riken.jp \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox