begin quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] as of Sat, Dec 29, 2007 at 03:55:26PM -0800: > On Sat, Dec 29, 2007 at 03:24:05PM -0800, SJS wrote: > > If data shows up once a day, then polling works > > great; if data arrival is random but bursty, a combination of polling and > > keeping the connection open would probably work. Etc. etc. > > I was imagining an AJAX Web based IM/IRC application so I guess that > qualifies as random but bursty every few seconds. What's wrong with, well, IRC?
> Why did you suggest a *hybrid* of polling and long lasting connections? > Is one better than the other if your goal is to serve as many people > as possible with a minimum level of performance? Um... because it's often how we -- well I -- use computers. If I ssh into a remote machine, my connection stays put, for awhile. If I'm idle for too long, the remote system logs me out, terminates my connection, and after awhile, I'll log back in again. Effectively, what I have is a low-overhead lasting connection up to some idle timeout, and then a longer polling interval, where I don't impose a significant load on the remote system's resources. Likewise, when I use mutt, I tend to read / reply to all the email, then I quit; and then I'll check again at longer and longer intervals, until something interesting shows up, which resets my interval span. It's a common pattern. -- Nothing is new, aside from one's point of view. Stewart Stremler -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
