Home » Mailing list archives » openbsd-misc » 2008 » April » 19

Re: poll(2) vs kqueue(2) performance

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
[view in full thread]
From: Jonathan Schleifer <js@...>
To: Edwin Eyan Moragas <haaktu@...>, <misc@...>
Subject: Re: poll(2) vs kqueue(2) performance
Date: Saturday, April 19, 2008 - 5:43 am

"Edwin Eyan Moragas"  wrote:


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


poll is more portable, while kqueue should be more performant (at

least, that's why it was invented). If your app only needs to run on

OpenBSD, NetBSD and FreeBSD, you're just fine with kqueue, otherwise

use poll. Generally, I think it's better to use poll and sacrifice that

unnoticable performance gain.


--

Jonathan
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
Messages in current thread:
poll(2) vs kqueue(2) performance, Edwin Eyan Moragas, (Sat Apr 19, 1:27 am)
Re: poll(2) vs kqueue(2) performance, Henning Brauer, (Mon Apr 21, 8:31 am)
Re: poll(2) vs kqueue(2) performance, Marco Peereboom, (Mon Apr 21, 10:43 am)
Re: poll(2) vs kqueue(2) performance, Gilles Chehade, (Mon Apr 21, 5:05 pm)
Re: poll(2) vs kqueue(2) performance, Niels Provos, (Wed Apr 23, 11:31 pm)
Re: poll(2) vs kqueue(2) performance, Marco Peereboom, (Sat Apr 26, 1:53 pm)
Re: poll(2) vs kqueue(2) performance, Jonathan Schleifer, (Sat Apr 19, 5:43 am)
Re: poll(2) vs kqueue(2) performance, Marc Espie, (Mon Apr 21, 8:38 am)
Re: poll(2) vs kqueue(2) performance, Edwin Eyan Moragas, (Mon Apr 21, 9:49 am)
Re: poll(2) vs kqueue(2) performance, Edwin Eyan Moragas, (Sat Apr 19, 11:29 pm)
Re: poll(2) vs kqueue(2) performance, Eric Faurot, (Sat Apr 19, 4:17 am)
Re: poll(2) vs kqueue(2) performance, Edwin Eyan Moragas, (Sat Apr 19, 4:38 am)
Re: poll(2) vs kqueue(2) performance , Theo de Raadt, (Sat Apr 19, 1:50 am)
Re: poll(2) vs kqueue(2) performance, Edwin Eyan Moragas, (Sat Apr 19, 2:46 am)