In my opinion, it's because the Go team put a ton of effort into getting M:N working and didn't rigorously evaluate any other alternatives in Go, once moving GC was implemented.
I'm not convinced that 1:1 wouldn't have been a perfectly reasonable implementation strategy for Go.
This is surprising. It seems like Go gets pretty high praise from all over for its threading model, and it seems like there are relatively few high-performance servers that are built with 1:1. Am I wrong about that? If not, what explains this?
Comments
In my opinion, it's because the Go team put a ton of effort into getting M:N working and didn't rigorously evaluate any other alternatives in Go, once moving GC was implemented.
I'm not convinced that 1:1 wouldn't have been a perfectly reasonable implementation strategy for Go.
This is surprising. It seems like Go gets pretty high praise from all over for its threading model, and it seems like there are relatively few high-performance servers that are built with 1:1. Am I wrong about that? If not, what explains this?