[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: communicating sequential processes
- From: Javier Guerra <javier@...>
- Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 19:17:19 -0500
Asko Kauppi wrote:
>
> I'm a fan of LuaProc's approach, as well.
>
> The basic difference to Lanes that I can recall was not having a 1:1
> relationship to OS threads. That makes LuaProc way more scalable.
>
> It does not matter if one only wants 10+ threads (Lua states) but it
> starts to matter in 100's and 1000's.
>
> Someone could merge the two efforts, s.a. teaching Lanes to use
> coroutines so that the N:M mapping becomes possible. Unfortunately, I
> won't be having much time in the future on Lua any more.
that's what my sample scheduler on Helper Threads Toolkit does, it manages a number of C helper threads, and shuffles another number of Lua 'threads' (coroutine based).
--
Javier
