qpid-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alan Conway <acon...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: Proton C "proactor" API for multi-threaded proton applications
Date Fri, 18 Nov 2016 00:44:10 GMT
On Thu, 2016-11-17 at 21:47 +0000, Adel Boutros wrote:
> Hello Alan,
> 
> 
> I have probably asked this question but suffering from amnesia I have
> to ask again if that is the case:
> 
> 
> For clients using the C++ bindings of proton-c and the
> messaging_handler, what should they change to profit from the
> proactor or is it an implicit benefit?

Implicit. We will use the proactor to provide a better IO layer
underneath but the C++ API will not change. The proactor design is
influenced by what we did with the C++ binding, so it should be an easy
fit. 

The cross-thread wakeup feature you reported as slow in the existing
C++ binding is part implemented directly on the underlying IO in the
proactor, whereas the existing C++ version is cobbled on top of the old
reactor - hence I'm hoping it will solve your performance issue.

 
> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> Adel
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Alan Conway <aconway@redhat.com>
> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 9:24:43 PM
> To: users
> Subject: Proton C "proactor" API for multi-threaded proton
> applications
> 
> The proactor API and an example implementation using libuv are now on
> master. There is an overview at ~/proton/proton-c/docs/api/index.md
> and
> API doc in the header files. index.md and proactor.h attached for
> your
> convenience.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@qpid.apache.org


Mime
View raw message