eg. with 16,000 threads in /proc, "ls /proc" is still fast:
real:0m0.032s user:0m0.007s sys:0m0.024s
without those threads, it's:
real:0m0.014s user:0m0.004s sys:0m0.010s
15 msecs difference. Even simple 'ls' reads the full /proc directory (all
16K+ entries). So performance-wise there's not a big difference.
architecture-wise there is a difference, and i'd be the last one arguing
against a tree-based approach to thread groups. It's much easier to find
threads belonging to a single 'process' via /proc this way - although no
functionality in procps has or requires such a feature currently.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 23 2003 - 22:00:29 EST