thank you, Theo.
On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 1:50 PM, Theo de Raadt  wrote:

quoted text
> > been reading the select(2) man pages and it mentions poll(2)

>  > being more efficient in most cases. this makes it obvious to

>  > discard the use of select(2) in writing new servers.

>

>  select requires that you set up a bit array correctly.  but often

>  people just use a fd_set, and cause a variety of strange buffer

>  overflow cases as soon as their fd's happen to be greater than the bit

>  size of the fd_set.

>

>  the kernel has to iterate over these bit arrays a few times.

>

>  for everyone involved, poll is just plain cheaper.

>

>  finally, go look at the latest commit to lib/libc/net/res_send.c to

>  see how much easier poll() is to use.

>

>

>  > i've come across some performance benchmarks which is trying

>  > to use kqueue(2).

>

>  shrug.  performance is only a small part of the whole.

>

>

>  > the question is, which one is more useful when writing new servers?

>  > kqueue or poll?

>

>  use poll.  it is easier to use -- the behaviours are less surprising.

>  it is also much more portable.  everyone has select and poll, and

>  quite honestly poll() is a better select(), even if it came out of

>  AT&T.

>

poll it is. again, many thanks.
--

garnet:jasmin:beryllium:gluon

90-12264

90-B