Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Fiber review January 6-15
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-01-10 11:08:23
On 7 Jan 2014 at 17:05, Nat Goodspeed wrote:
> > I appreciate and understand this. However, I must then ask this: is
> > your library ready to enter Boost if you have not done any
> > performance testing or tuning?
> I don't have a C10K problem, but I do have a code-organization
> problem. Much essential processing in a large old client app is
> structured (if that's the word I want) as chains of callbacks from
> asynchronous network I/O. Given the latency of the network requests,
> fibers would have to have ridiculous, shocking overhead before it
> would start to bother me.
> I think that's a valid class of use cases. I don't buy the argument
> that adoption of Fiber requires performance tuning first.
I agree one doesn't need to performance tune to enter Boost.
I disagree with not at least _measuring_ performance before entering
Boost. One should at least have some minimal idea as to performance.
I would really like to see at least one graph of scaling with the
number of active contexts, both for CPU and RAM footprint.
-- Currently unemployed and looking for work. Work Portfolio: http://careers.stackoverflow.com/nialldouglas/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk