Re: kqueue microbenchmark resul

2000-10-28 Thread Dan Kegel
> >In fact, if you did leave the read queued in a daemon using select() > >before, you'd keep looping endlessly taking all CPU and never idle > >because there would always be read data available. That would be a programming error on the part of the application. Any application using a

Re: kqueue microbenchmark resul

2000-10-28 Thread Marko Macek
>In fact, if you did leave the read queued in a daemon using select() >before, you'd keep looping endlessly taking all CPU and never idle >because there would always be read data available. Also, level triggered notifications would also seem to cause multiple thread wakeups and thundering herd

Re: kqueue microbenchmark resul

2000-10-28 Thread Marko Macek
In fact, if you did leave the read queued in a daemon using select() before, you'd keep looping endlessly taking all CPU and never idle because there would always be read data available. Also, level triggered notifications would also seem to cause multiple thread wakeups and thundering herd

Re: kqueue microbenchmark resul

2000-10-28 Thread Dan Kegel
In fact, if you did leave the read queued in a daemon using select() before, you'd keep looping endlessly taking all CPU and never idle because there would always be read data available. That would be a programming error on the part of the application. Any application using a