[Mono-list] Mono and concurrency/parallelism

Jacobo G. Polavieja jacobopolavieja at gmail.com
Sat Aug 26 05:31:23 EDT 2006

Miguel de Icaza wrote:
> Hello,
>> I like the simplicity and productivity of Mono, but I'm afraid how it's 
>> going to behave (in terms of efficiency) with the new hardware to come 
>> (4,8, or more processors in some years?).
> It largely depends on how you write your code, Mono has very little to
> say here.
> If your code calls into code that locks, it will scale poorly, but there
> are "best practices" about how to work on those scenarios already, so
> just follow those practices.
(FIRST, sorry Miguel, I sent this mail to you only forgetting to CCing 
it to the list)

About my message, sorry also for not being too specific.

What I was trying to ask is about other parallelism methods. I mean...
from what I've read MonoThreads actually maps to OS threads, and this is
known to be not the most efficient approach for concurrent apps.
What I was trying to get feedback on is about parallelism in Mono
compared to other systems/languages that seem to have better support for
  this (like Erlang and some other concurrency specific languages).

I've read a little about SecondLife's implementation of MicroThreads,
and also the development of continuations (which I've understood is
another implementation of microthreads). What I don't is:
1) How efficient are MicroThreads (or any other possible concurrent
approach Mono could have) compared to actual MonoThreads and to
Erlang/whatever language focused on concurrency?
2) Are MicroThreads (or any other system) usable and suitable for
desktop apps?

So, my question was more about alternative parallelism methods on Mono,
which is what I'm most concerned about.
(All this from my newbie view of assuming MonoThreads has the same
problems of PThreads: consider how expensive creating threads is,
locking code, reduced number of threads, etc).

Thanks a lot for any kind of information.


More information about the Mono-list mailing list