apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bill Stoddard <b...@wstoddard.com>
Subject Re: [WIN32] alternative apr_pollset implementation proposal
Date Wed, 20 Apr 2005 10:43:26 GMT
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> This makes alot of sense.  But we are talking about the need for
> large scale parallelism, not discrete events.  Once a given unit
> of I/O work can be performed on a given socket or pipe, it's going
> to be time to farm it out to a worker.
> 
> Somewhere in this scheme we need to consider dispatching.

If I understand your meaning, that's one of the nice features of IOCPs. You can block your
worker threads 
against an IOCP (actual call is GetQueuedCompletionStatus()) and the NT kernel will dispatch
threads in LIFO 
order to handle io completion notifications.  Of course we would hide all those details in
an apr_pollset_* call.

Bill


Mime
View raw message