On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 10:33 AM, Clint Webb <webb.cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am using libevent for a high performance messaging system and am > currently doing some cleanup of the code. > In looking at the way I use libevent I'm wondering if I am doing it right. > > Essentially I have a daemon that is a managed message queue, and it > receives connections from a large number of nodes. Once a node is > connected, it generally stays connected. The nodes send messages that need > to be delivered to either once of a load-balanced set, a single node, or all > nodes of a group. So therefore, all nodes are set with EV_READ | > EV_PERSIST. > > All nodes are in non-blocking mode. When data needs to be sent to a node, > it does a send straight away. If it manages to send it all then all is > good, but if it only sends part of the data, or returns EWOULDBLOCK, it then > needs to change the event to add EV_WRITE to it, so that it can send the > rest of the data when the socket is ready for more writes. > > I have been doing this by using event_del to delete the event, then I was > using event_set to change the event to EV_READ | EV_WRITE | EV_PERSIST, and > then I event_add it back into the loop. > > When all data has been sent, it does the same thing again, but removed the > EV_WRITE. > > Is this how other people do it, or am I doing some unnecessary things? > > -- > "Be excellent to each other" > I didn't really get an answer on my question, but I thought I would follow up with what I am actually doing now. As I stated before I was using one event for both read and write notification, but now am using a read event for reads (all the time) and only creating the write event when the socket would block on write, and have a different callback for read and write handing. This has made my code a lot more simpler and I'm quite happy with it. -- "Be excellent to each other"
_______________________________________________ Libevent-users mailing list Libevent-users@monkey.org http://monkeymail.org/mailman/listinfo/libevent-users
