Subject: Re: [boost] [afio] Formal review of Boost.AFIO
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-08-31 10:30:27
On 30 Aug 2015 at 19:46, Glen Fernandes wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 30, 2015, Gruenke,Matt wrote:
> > This obviously isn't a proper review, and shouldn't be counted as such.
> > Rather, I pose a question to other reviewers: for how many of you does
> > this actually solve a problem you've faced or anticipate? For me, the
> > answer is "no". Otherwise, I'd invest further time in a proper review.
> This is exactly what I feel. The answer is "no" for me too. This is
> also the reason why I haven't submitted a formal review.
> I was interested in Boost having an asynchronous file I/O library and
> was looking forward to reviewing AFIO because of all the discussion on
> the list previously about performance. What I was expecting was also a
> portable abstraction over platform specific APIs like KAIO or
> overlapped I/O.
Linux KAIO is a remarkably useless async i/o API, at least to Linux
kernel 3.2 on ext4 which was the last I tested. It was no better than
a thread pool. This is why I have been in no rush to add support.
The Windows IOCP backend does deliver significant benefits, IF you
restructure your algorithms to fit.
-- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk