- 1. Re: Different select/poll implementations (score: 1)
- Author: genes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Gene Shekhtman)
- Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 16:43:35 -0800 (PST)
- I think that the performance impact of different poll() implementations is somewhat overrated by kernel people. In the ST architecture poll() or select() is only called in the idle state when the run
- /archives/state-threads/2001-01/msg00002.html (8,268 bytes)
- 2. Different select/poll implementations (score: 1)
- Author: Dan Melomedman <dmelomed@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 13:09:31 -0500
- This has probably slipped someone's mind before, but I still would like to ask if state-threads will also support more scalable implementations like Niels Provos' /dev/poll and FreeBSD's kqueues in t
- /archives/state-threads/2000-12/msg00001.html (6,155 bytes)
- 3. Re: Different select/poll implementations (score: 1)
- Author: genes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Gene Shekhtman)
- Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 16:43:35 -0800 (PST)
- I think that the performance impact of different poll() implementations is somewhat overrated by kernel people. In the ST architecture poll() or select() is only called in the idle state when the run
- /archives/state-threads/2001-01/msg00006.html (8,368 bytes)
- 4. Different select/poll implementations (score: 1)
- Author: Dan Melomedman <dmelomed@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 13:09:31 -0500
- This has probably slipped someone's mind before, but I still would like to ask if state-threads will also support more scalable implementations like Niels Provos' /dev/poll and FreeBSD's kqueues in t
- /archives/state-threads/2000-12/msg00003.html (6,155 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu