Re: Lazy lists and optimizing for responsiveness

2005-09-21 Thread Yuval Kogman
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 14:47:33 -0400, Austin Frank wrote: Would the named adverbs for gather work in other contexts as well? Would you suggest this mechanism for specifying the buffering behavior for IO operations? See scook's email below... I think that yes. Here is a reference

Re: Lazy lists and optimizing for responsiveness

2005-09-20 Thread Austin Frank
TSa wrote: IIRC, $Larry has mentioned a Pipe type which to me seems to be just the generic type where you configure the buffer/queue size. In multi-threaded (or connected processes) applications the buffer size needs tuning to balance responsiveness with throughput. Thus your gather proposal

Re: Lazy lists and optimizing for responsiveness

2005-09-20 Thread Stuart Cook
On 19/09/05, Yuval Kogman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This solution lacks the elegance of the lazy loading approach, but has the best responsiveness. These implementations tend to be overly complex for what they do, and hence not worth the maintenance costs. The gain is that the user only has

Re: Lazy lists and optimizing for responsiveness

2005-09-19 Thread TSa
HaloO, Yuval Kogman wrote: One thing that is extraordinarily hard to do with the facilities we have today is finding the responsive optimum between laziness and eagerness. Good, that you remind me to this subject! I wanted to ask the same question starting from more theoretical grounds. I