Re: [Algorithms] General purpose task parallel threading approach

[<asy...@gm...>]

>Storing stacks for each task, and allowing arbitrary
>synchronous waits between tasks is simply not going to scale to
>many-core machines IMO, so wanting to do that is like wanting to not scale.
Why not ? As far as there is something to do for a worker thread while tasks
are waiting it is Ok, isn't it ?

Alexander.


2009/4/14 Jon Watte <jw...@gm...>

> Sebastian Sylvan wrote:
> > In my opinion a task system that places restrictions (fairly severe
> > ones IMO) on what kinds of code you can run in tasks can not
> > reasonably be called a "general" system. I don't find this to be an
> > unreasonable definition.
>
> Note that the system I describe doesn't actually restrict you from
> dynamically spawning tasks; it just restricts you from generally waiting
> synchronously for the completion of those tasks after you spawn them.
> Synchronization is done based on dependencies known when the task gets
> scheduled. Thus, anything dynamic is restricted to happening between
> individual work task invocations, which I think is about as granular as
> you would want it. Storing stacks for each task, and allowing arbitrary
> synchronous waits between tasks is simply not going to scale to
> many-core machines IMO, so wanting to do that is like wanting to not scale.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> jw
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by:
> High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
> Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
> _______________________________________________
> GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> GDA...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list
> Archives:
> http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=gdalgorithms-list
>



-- 
Regards,
Alexander Karnakov