> > I think this is probably not worth it. If I were doing it, I'd > implement it using pipes first, and keep the circular buffer idea up > my sleeve as a potential performance tweak if the overhead on the > pipes turned out to be a noticeable drag.
How much extra speed are we talking about here? I can't imagine it would really be worth it. You will probably have a better program overall if you make debugging easier. > > -S > > Travis Bemann <bemann at bemann.sourceforge.net> writes: > > > I've been thinking about using shared circular buffers for IPC in > > nfreenetd (which is a multiprocess Freenet node daemon for Unix/Linux > > written in C) instead of pipes (which I previously decided to use). > > The advantages of using this technique is that it would have *very > > little* overhead (you don't have to go through the Unix/Linux kernel > > at all), but it has the severe disadvantage of being very difficult to > > debug. Do you think that the advantages of this are worth it, or am I > > crazy to do something like this? Note that I've already thought out > > all the semantics and signaling necessary for this. > > > > -- > > Travis Bemann > > Sendmail is still screwed up on my box. > > My email address is really bemann at execpc.com. > > _______________________________________________ > Freenet-dev mailing list > Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev > _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
