On Wed, Dec 26, 2001 at 12:57:59AM -0500, Jason Boxman wrote: > If design a session to, say, talk to a remote HTTP server and return data, > does it make sense to daemonize it or to simply start a new session of > (object instance) for each request (I expect to be making hundreds)?
Only hundreds? :) POE::Component::Client::HTTP is a "daemon" component that does user-agent things on behalf of other sessions. The client sessions post requests to it, and it posts responses back as they arrive. PoCo::Client::HTTP performs all its requests in a single session. It stores SocketFactory and ReadWrite wheels with their corresponding requests. > Is there some logical reason why one method's better than the other or is it > simply a matter of personal taste? Chris Fedde has a good point: network overhead often dwarfs library overhead. That said, the method that must do more work usually takes longer. If you need speed, avoid creating and destroying sessions if you can. > I used httpd.perl as a template, so I'm employing the latter technique > presently. Is the former or some other technique a better approach? Two HTTP client components are already written. Have a look at POE::Component::Client::UserAgent and/or ::HTTP. > Would it make sense to retain the original SocketFactory listener session and > add a single daemonized session to handle requests and post the results to > another daemonized 'saver' session? Wait, listener? Are you writing a client or a server? -- Rocco Caputo / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / poe.perl.org / poe.sourceforge.net
