Re: sproc FOLLOW-UP

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

Michael T. Jones (mtj++at++babar.engr.sgi.com)
Thu, 17 Jul 1997 07:32:59 -0700

On Jul 16, 9:37pm, Glenn Waldron wrote:
> Subject: Re: sproc FOLLOW-UP
> Tom Impelluso wrote:
> >
> > This is a follow-up to my question on sproc() vs fork() with Performer.
> ...
> > As I understand, sproc() is like fork(), but the sproc()'ed process is
> > in the same address space. Thus, I can obviate the necessity for
> > shared memory. and all that expensive overhead.
                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

FYI, there is no expensive overhead for shared memory on SGI systems.

-- 


praesto et persto,  Phone:415.933.1455   Fax:415.965.2658   MS:8U-590
Michael T. Jones    Silicon Graphics, Advanced Graphics Software, SSG
mtj++at++sgi.com         2011 N. Shoreline Blvd., Mtn. View, CA 94039-7311
120 Mario 64 Stars  OpenGL/ImageVision/OpenInventor/Performer/Cosmo3D
                    CosmoOpenGL/MolecularInventor/OpenGLOptimizer/...
=======================================================================
List Archives, FAQ, FTP:  http://www.sgi.com/Technology/Performer/
            Submissions:  info-performer++at++sgi.com
        Admin. requests:  info-performer-request++at++sgi.com

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Mon Aug 10 1998 - 17:55:37 PDT

This message has been cleansed for anti-spam protection. Replace '++at++' in any mail addresses with the '@' symbol.