Frank Joerdens
2002-Sep-11 05:47 UTC
Is wine *always* mapping threads onto processes? (Was: Re: multiple instance
On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 10:43:12AM +0200, Fredrik Persson wrote:> > > it's probably a unique instance of the app with 5 threads in it. > > > each windows thread matches a unix-like process. > > > > Is that the general way wine translates windows threads, mapping them > > onto processes? Would that really be a good idea? Usually the argument > > goes that designing an app in a multithreaded rather than multiprocess > > fashion is better, more resource friendly, albeit harder to do (e.g. > > because inter-thread communication is much easier to do than > > inter-process communication). > > Guys, are you *sure* that this is how Wine does it? You know, Linux always lists > threads as separate processes in the ps listing.Then it probably doesn't. That Linux lists threads like processes would explain it, kind of. What still bothers me a little though is that if I start the application under Windows 2000, in the Task-Manager I see exactly one instance consuming 32 MB of RAM, whereas top under Linux shows 5, consuming 32 MB each, or so it seems. Would top give false information here about RAM consumption? Regards, Frank
Nick Capik
2002-Sep-11 06:29 UTC
Is wine *always* mapping threads onto processes? (Was: Re: multiple instance
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I believe that this memory is shared between the processes, so that the total usage for the 5 processes is 32 MB. (I am simply repeating what was said previously about a similar situation, so don't ask many details ;) Nick Capik On Wednesday 11 September 2002 06:47 am, Frank Joerdens wrote:> On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 10:43:12AM +0200, Fredrik Persson wrote: > > > > it's probably a unique instance of the app with 5 threads in it. > > > > each windows thread matches a unix-like process. > > > > > > Is that the general way wine translates windows threads, mapping them > > > onto processes? Would that really be a good idea? Usually the argument > > > goes that designing an app in a multithreaded rather than multiprocess > > > fashion is better, more resource friendly, albeit harder to do (e.g. > > > because inter-thread communication is much easier to do than > > > inter-process communication). > > > > Guys, are you *sure* that this is how Wine does it? You know, Linux > > always lists threads as separate processes in the ps listing. > > Then it probably doesn't. That Linux lists threads like processes would > explain it, kind of. What still bothers me a little though is that if I > start the application under Windows 2000, in the Task-Manager I see > exactly one instance consuming 32 MB of RAM, whereas top under Linux > shows 5, consuming 32 MB each, or so it seems. Would top give false > information here about RAM consumption? > > Regards, Frank > _______________________________________________ > wine-users mailing list > wine-users@winehq.com > http://www.winehq.com/mailman/listinfo/wine-users-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE9fykqP1TgTrKOOgsRAqQTAJwKX7iT8BK8xdCrz74ipWXqVyqUCACgwjwP edyfGq9LVajlKXzcQmCdoh4=/uio -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Tom Williams
2002-Sep-11 10:17 UTC
Is wine *always* mapping threads onto processes? (Was: Re: multiple instance
Frank Joerdens wrote:> Would top give false > information here about RAM consumption? >Well, now that you know that "ps" shows threads as processes on Linux, EACH thread for that processes should show the SAME about of RAM usage. If this is always the case, it's just up to you to interpret the "ps" output properly. If there was a case that an instance of a thread for a process would be reported as using a DIFFERENT amount of RAM, then you might be somewhat concerned. If the thread implementation on Linux is changed in the future, then the "ps" output might be different. In other words, I think "top" and "ps" wouldn't "lie" about resource usage. The display of the resource usage is just different than what you are used to seeing. Keep in mind, Windows NT and later was designed as multi-threaded OSes from day one and threads on Unix were added later on...... Peace..... Tom
Sylvain Petreolle
2002-Sep-11 10:42 UTC
Is wine *always* mapping threads onto processes? (Was: Re: multiple instance
To be sure, be the same as Saint Thomas: issue a free before and after the launch of wine app. So you'll see that the application uses only 32 MB, instead of 160.> Then it probably doesn't. That Linux lists threads like processes > would > explain it, kind of. What still bothers me a little though is that if > I > start the application under Windows 2000, in the Task-Manager I see > exactly one instance consuming 32 MB of RAM, whereas top under Linux > shows 5, consuming 32 MB each, or so it seems. Would top give false > information here about RAM consumption?___________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en fran?ais ! Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
Maybe Matching Threads
- Is wine *always* mapping threads onto processes? (Was: Re: multiple inst
- Is wine *always* mapping threads onto processes? (Was: Re: multiple inst
- wine initialising... then nothing
- multiple instances of app each consuming 32 MB . . . (???)
- wine on non-x86 architectures (presumably silly question)