[erlang-questions] NIF vs. Linked-in Drivers

Max Lapshin <>
Tue Dec 8 21:17:45 CET 2009

On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 11:15 PM, Ulf Wiger
<> wrote:
> If you have a limited number of instances of a blocking
> NIF, you could add that number of extra schedulers to
> the system when you start Erlang. Not sure if that would
> have any particular bad side-effects... perhaps the VM
> experts know?

Linkedin driver subsystem has excelent capabilities to schedule long
task on pool of threads.
It seems, that it will be required to implement thread pool with NIF.
Am I wrong?

NIF is especially useable, while adding rare functions from system
API, that are missed in ERTS.

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list