apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <traw...@attglobal.net>
Subject Re: [PATCH] speed up network timeout processing
Date Wed, 03 Jul 2002 15:35:48 GMT
"Ryan Bloom" <rbb@covalent.net> writes:

> > From: trawick@rdu88-250-182.nc.rr.com [mailto:trawick@rdu88-250-
> > 
> > "Ryan Bloom" <rbb@covalent.net> writes:
> > 
> > > > From: trawick@rdu88-250-182.nc.rr.com [mailto:trawick@rdu88-250-
> > > >
> > > > A little bird told me that FD_ZERO() burns lots of cycles in
> > > > apr_wait_for_io_or_timeout().  It turns out that this is an easy
> > > > conversion to poll(), which doesn't have such overhead in the
> > > > interface.
> > > >
> > > > This works for me with some testing (timeouts on read and write
> work
> > > > for me).
> > >
> > > Can we remove the #ifdef's by just using apr_poll here?
> > 
> > I'd rather we not, since that introduces a fair amount of extra
> > overhead.
> 
> Then let's get rid of the overhead.

redesign the API

>                                        If we don't use apr_poll, then the
> overhead is maintenance,

the marginal extra maintenance is certainly something I can live with
here...  this is an important path within APR...  if we can use the
most efficient mechanism without much extra maintenance then we
should...

-- 
Jeff Trawick | trawick@attglobal.net
Born in Roswell... married an alien...

Mime
View raw message