@alan: are you having actual performance issues or is it more of a theoretical exploration ?
In practice it's more likely that the bottleneck will be your app IMO. On 27 March 2013 09:17, alan turing <[email protected]> wrote: > This is not break the paradigm, you can have libtask handling per native > thread (core) in one process, and earn resilient architecture: *shared data > structures > *don't need route incoming connection to mongrel2 process > *SSL session cache > *eliminate file system locks accessed from multiple processes > *smart connection pooling to 0MQ > *more operations friendly design (e.g statistics can be collected from > one process) > > You decide this approach because libtask "feature", or I am missing > something...? > > > On Wednesday, March 27, 2013, Josh Simmons wrote: > >> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 7:02 AM, alan turing <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> And what about shared data structures - you will start with shared >>> memory and such solutions, it could be very complex for a lot of >>> perspectives... >>> did you investigate why libtask has this limitation?? >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Cheers. >>> >>> >> This limitation is actually a feature of the design. >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coroutine >> >
