🚀 go-pugleaf

"Dennis Jones" <djones@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:3e6fd97b$1@newsgroups.borland.com...

> Are you saying that the program experiences no degredation
> in performance due to those 100's of context switches, or that
> the program is not significantly impaired by 100's of context
> switches?

Both, actually.

> You probably have a case where fewer threads might be
> more efficient from the OS'es perspective (because of
> context switching), but would be unacceptable from the
> application's perspective (because the application is
> expected to, or required to, perform those 100's of
> operations simultaneously).

Most of those threads are doing the exact same thing (processing the same
kind of data, just from different sources), so I don't really see how one
can be seen as more efficient as another from the OS's perspective

> Is it possible for your application to operate with fewer
> threads (say, 4 or 5)?

No, it is not (ithout a major if not complete re-write of the app, which is
in the millions of lines of code now).  Each thread is tied to a particular
source of incoming data from various hardware.  Because of the nature of the
data (real-time live feed), even trying to merge two of those threads into a
single thread to handle both sources would probably degrade both operations
from the application's point of view.  Even if it didn't, and we merged them
2 at a time, we'd still need much more than just 4-5, we'd still need closer
to 30-40.


Gambit