From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8305 invoked by alias); 5 Apr 2005 07:03:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact pthreads-win32-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: pthreads-win32-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 8170 invoked from network); 5 Apr 2005 07:02:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp814.mail.ukl.yahoo.com) (217.12.12.204) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 5 Apr 2005 07:02:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.2.7?) (s.croall@btinternet.com@217.43.204.216 with plain) by smtp814.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Apr 2005 07:02:51 -0000 Message-ID: <42523837.1060309@btinternet.com> Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 07:03:00 -0000 From: Steve Croall Reply-To: scroall@tibco.com User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pthreads-Win32 list Subject: Re: pthreads-w32 2.2.0 test failures References: <1E2E66102E75104D8C740340EBCD9867144A37@tomoex.tomotherapy.com> In-Reply-To: <1E2E66102E75104D8C740340EBCD9867144A37@tomoex.tomotherapy.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2005/txt/msg00061.txt.bz2 FYI I'm running pthreads on a number of multi-CPU machines. My twin :( And three 8-Ways in the office. It's also been run on a 32-way and it has been given a damn good thrashing. More and more of our server applications are being made multi-threaded. For example, two single-thread RPC servers in C have been re-implmented as mulit-threaded RPC servers in C++. From taking 25% CPU load on a quad-machine I can now max-out most multi-CPU machines. Woo woo :) (The main problem we found was that RPC is not thread-safe so we had to implement our own thread-safe version using Sun's implementation. Even the RPC on Solaris is not thread-safe.) Our server applications runs on a number of different platforms (it has been reduced). Currently Windows, Solaris, AIX & HP-UX. So this project has been a help over a few years now. We did find problems with older implementations, small bugs etc... that have been fixed in later releases. I'm a bit concerned about the pthread_once() bug though. Have you a test application that shows this problem or are the test applications enough to show this? Thanks, Steve Croall. Tim Theisen wrote: > I agree with your assessment. Those tests need improvement. > > At least you know someone is giving pthreads-w32 a run for its > money on a multiprocessor system. > > ...Tim > > -----Original Message----- > From: pthreads-win32-owner@sources.redhat.com > [mailto:pthreads-win32-owner@sources.redhat.com]On Behalf Of Ross > Johnson > Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 21:06 > To: Pthreads-Win32 list > Subject: Re: pthreads-w32 2.2.0 test failures > > > All of these are unserialised shared global variables in the tests > themselves!! Sketchy test coding that didn't show up on my single > processor. > > Almost certain it's not a problem with the library. > > Thanks. > Ross > -- J. Senior Software Engineer, TIBCO BPM Group. T. +44 (0) 1792 360773 M. +44 (0) 7788 971394 E. scroall@tibco.com W. www.tibco.com