Re: async poll

[John Gardiner Myers <jgmyers@netscape.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1042 bytes --]



Davide Libenzi wrote:

>We're again looping talking about threads and fd being bounced between
>threads. It seems that we've very different opinions about the use of
>threads and how server applications should be designed. IMHO if you're
>thinking of bouncing fds among threads for their handling you're doing
>something somehow wrong, but this is just my opinion ...
>
Again, it comes down to whether or not one has the luxury of being able 
to (re)write one's application and supporting libraries from scratch. 
 If one can ensure that the code for handling an event will never block 
for any significant amount of time, then single-threaded process-per-CPU 
will most likely perform best.  If, on the other hand, the code for 
handling an event can occasionally block, then one needs a thread pool 
in order to have reasonable latency.

A thread pool based server that is released will trivially outperform a 
single threaded server that needs a few more years development to 
convert all the blocking calls to use the event subsystem.


[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 3711 bytes --]