[Xitami] 50+ simultaneous users...

[Brian {Hamilton Kelly}]

In message <3C93D697.E536F65C@rci.rutgers.edu> Paul Reid writes:
> >>What O/S?
> 
> > Win2000 ...  Hope this helps!
> 
> Doesn't help me, I just thought some wiser person would know the
> limits. You later suggested 128 processes which is in the
> ballpark  with your observed 100 process choke-point. I don't
> know the limits, but since much NT core comes from OS/2 which is
> pushing 2 decades old, but MS has had fingers in it, those
> numbers are not implausible. 

OS/2 at the time when Microsoft had their dirty fingers in it might have
had such a limitation; since BillyG threw his toys out of the pram, and
IBM continued alone with OS/2 v2 (and later Warp v3 and v4, and nowadays
v4.52; not to mention eComStation) there's been nothing like any such
limitation in OS/2.  I have seen people speak of running THOUSANDS of
threads, in many hundreds of processes, without any problems, in OS/2.

There again, if such a limitation existed in early OS/2 code (when M$
were still on-board), it may well have been carried through into WinNT
and Win2K.

Which is the only OS that supports SMP with up to 64 processors on the
x86 family?  It's not Linux; neither is it Windoze.

-- 
Brian {Hamilton Kelly}                                          bhk@dsl.co.uk
    "We have gone from a world of concentrated knowledge and wisdom to one of
    distributed ignorance.  And we know and understand less while being incr-
    easingly capable."              Prof. Peter Cochrane, formerly of BT Labs