Dan Kegel wrote:
> Davide Libenzi wrote:
> >>Do you avoid the cost of epoll_ctl() per new fd?
> >
> >Jamie, the cost of epoll_ctl(2) is minimal/zero compared with the average
> >life of a connection.
>
> Depends on the workload. Where I work, the http client I'm writing
> has to perform extremely well even on 1 byte files with HTTP 1.0.
> Minimizing system calls is suprisingly important - even
> a gettimeofday hurts.
For this sort of thing, I would like to see an option to automatically
set the non-blocking flag on accept(). To really squeeze the system
calls, you could also automatically epoll-register on accept(), and
for super bonus automatically do the accept() at event delivery time.
But it's getting very silly at that point.
-- Jamie
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 07 2002 - 22:00:21 EST