On 1/4/04 1:53 AM, "Dar Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Saturday, January 3, 2004, at 07:27 AM, Doug Lerner wrote: > >> Never mind my last message - I did get it to "push" according to your >> suggestion. > > But I don't see how that would go into high-CPU consumption.
It didn't. It worked fine. That's why I said never mind my last message. :) I guess the login in Rev for this is "when it successfully finishes a read until CRLF send the message on, otherwise let other handlers continue working and in the meantime nicely share cpu time while I am waiting for more data." At any rate, it works fine. > > I usually don't use "until <lineEnd>", though I have no argument > against it. Maybe that changes the behavior. I filter for messages at > the receive handler. > > I do get a high-CPU consumption state when the sender keeps sending > gobs of data. In a GUI app, this is hard to get out of since pending > messages normally have higher priority over event messages. I choke > this two ways. One is to put a delay between the read handler and the > next read. The other is to detect the situation and shut down the > connection. (I use other methods for accept.) OK. A good caution to look out for. doug > > Revolution does "push" at the end of a write, but there might not be a > way to insist on that kind of thing in other applications. > > I'm curious about the high-CPU consumption. If there are cases in > which it can occur, I'd like to know about them. > > Dar Scott > > _______________________________________________ > use-revolution mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
