Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #18376

Re: thread vs fork?

Received	by 10.66.81.202 with SMTP id c10mr2441144pay.40.1346201320177; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 17:48:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received	by 10.68.136.7 with SMTP id pw7mr61741pbb.1.1346201320161; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 17:48:40 -0700 (PDT)
Path	csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!news.snarked.org!newsfeed.news.ucla.edu!usenet.stanford.edu!4no24018304pbn.1!news-out.google.com!a8ni89864317pbd.1!nntp.google.com!4no24018300pbn.1!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups	comp.lang.java.programmer
Date	Tue, 28 Aug 2012 17:48:39 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To	<k1jmh9$t9k$1@dont-email.me>
Complaints-To	groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info	glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=69.28.149.29; posting-account=CP-lKQoAAAAGtB5diOuGlDQk0jIwmH0T
NNTP-Posting-Host	69.28.149.29
References	<15cf029d-e8bc-47de-8b83-44e70247d381@googlegroups.com> <euto38td1cm90mg7qg11b2375oh925hj7q@4ax.com> <dca1d3b6-47f2-4145-8797-b2b720af1bcb@googlegroups.com> <k1jmh9$t9k$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent	G2/1.0
MIME-Version	1.0
Message-ID	<0c7750b2-3c6c-416e-8cfe-2673aee3259b@googlegroups.com> (permalink)
Subject	Re: thread vs fork?
From	Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com>
Injection-Date	Wed, 29 Aug 2012 00:48:40 +0000
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:18376

Show key headers only | View raw

Joshua Cranmer wrote:
> Lew wrote:
>> Roedy Green wrote:
>>> Peter Cheung wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said:
>>>> hi, is fork runs faster then thread in java [sic]?
> 
>>> There is obviously less overhead with a new thread than forking off a
>>> new process.  A thread shares the same pool of objects.  A fork has
> 
>> What does that have to do with Java?
> 
> Traditionally, the term "fork" has been used to refer to "creating a new 
> process" (the traditional way of handling concurrency in Unix code)--the 
> Unix syscall for this step is literally called "fork." On Unix-based 
> system, process creation is extremely low overhead, so process-based 
> parallelism was more common than on Windows where making a new process 
> is painfully slow.
> 
> When I first saw the OP's question, I first thought he was referring to 
> fork in the process-creation sense, so it's not clear to me offhand if 
> he is referring to the process-creation fork or Java-framework fork.

The OP explicitly said, "in java [sic]". That clears up that question completely.

-- 
Lew

Thread

thread vs fork? Peter Cheung <cmk128@gmail.com> - 2012-08-25 23:40 -0700
  Re: thread vs fork? "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-26 03:27 -0400
  Re: thread vs fork? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-08-26 09:34 -0400
  Re: thread vs fork? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-08-28 00:52 -0700
    Re: thread vs fork? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-08-28 13:54 -0700
      Re: thread vs fork? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2012-08-28 19:08 -0500
        Re: thread vs fork? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-08-28 17:48 -0700
          Re: thread vs fork? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2012-08-28 20:01 -0500
            Re: thread vs fork? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-08-29 11:01 -0700

csiph-web