Re: [boost] Re: [network] An RFC - updated

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-24 09:40:01

Don G wrote:
> Without threads the network would have a capacity limit of
> FD_SETSIZE, but even with threads the system has a limit. I found it
> trying to stress test my thread pool solution<g>. So, if the capacity
> limit of FD_SETSIZE is acceptable for the application, and threads
> are to be avoided, then I can see their argument.

FD_SETSIZE only applies to select, and nobody uses select except in "quick 
and dirty" servers (as I did recently).

The idea of an explicit poll() call is to allow the implementation to use a 
single-threaded dispatch mechanism (select/epoll/kqueue), if one is 
available. Without poll() you are forced to use worker thread(s) and a 
callback queue to support a single-threaded application, and this can be 
considerably less efficient than epoll/kqueue (or select in the < FD_SETSIZE 
case) (in theory).

Of course, if the threaded model can be demonstrated to achieve comparable 
performance, there would be no need to complicate the interface with poll().