thank you, Theo. On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 1:50 PM, Theo de Raadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > been reading the select(2) man pages and it mentions poll(2) > > being more efficient in most cases. this makes it obvious to > > discard the use of select(2) in writing new servers. > > select requires that you set up a bit array correctly. but often > people just use a fd_set, and cause a variety of strange buffer > overflow cases as soon as their fd's happen to be greater than the bit > size of the fd_set. > > the kernel has to iterate over these bit arrays a few times. > > for everyone involved, poll is just plain cheaper. > > finally, go look at the latest commit to lib/libc/net/res_send.c to > see how much easier poll() is to use. > > > > i've come across some performance benchmarks which is trying > > to use kqueue(2). > > shrug. performance is only a small part of the whole. > > > > the question is, which one is more useful when writing new servers? > > kqueue or poll? > > use poll. it is easier to use -- the behaviours are less surprising. > it is also much more portable. everyone has select and poll, and > quite honestly poll() is a better select(), even if it came out of > AT&T. >
poll it is. again, many thanks. -- garnet:jasmin:beryllium:gluon 90-12264 90-B
