From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 09:31:59 +0000
From: Jason Ozolins <jason.ozolins@anu.edu.au>
Message-ID: <396BD2AC.9BA22564@anu.edu.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <sharris@sch1.NCTR.FDA.GOV>, <20000711212037.24406.qmail@g.bio.cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Re: Any significant gotchas?
Topicbox-Message-UUID: d8a2e01e-eac8-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

Scott Schwartz wrote:

> | a select()-based approach is orders of magnitude better at throughput
> | and maximum number of connections.
> 
> And yet people are constantly writing papers about how select() and poll()
> are too inefficient, and proposing various other schemes.

Maybe so, but how does that increase the merit of spawning lots of
threads just to get select()-like behaviour, if the experience on other
OSs suggests that the thread approach is even less efficient than
select()?

If people have some references to articles on approaches other than
fd-per-thread or traditional select(), could they maybe post them to the
group?

Thanks,
   Jason =:^)
-- 
Jason Ozolins
Technical Support Group                 Local: x5449
Department of Computer Science         Global: +61 2 6249 5449          
The Australian National University      Email: jason.ozolins@anu.edu.au