Marc, Henning,

thank you for the insight.

On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Marc Espie <espie@nerim.net> wrote:
quoted text
>
> On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 11:43:20AM +0200, Jonathan Schleifer wrote:
>  > "Edwin Eyan Moragas" <haaktu@gmail.com> wrote:
>  >
>  > > the question is, which one is more useful when writing new servers?
>  > > kqueue or poll?
>  >
>  > 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.
>
>  As usual, depends what you want to do.
>
>  poll() and select() give you control over file descriptors. kqueue
>  encompasses more events. It's not especially faster, it just leads to
>  simpler code in case you need the supplementary events.
>
>  If all you need to do is watch over a set of file descriptors, poll
>  and select are the simplest ones to use... and the most portable.
>
>  In many, many cases, poll() is better. The only case where select comes
>  close is when you want to watch over most of your file descriptors (because
>  you access less memory in such a case).
>
>  And then, you should profile. I'm not even sure it makes a difference.
>
>  Most of the places in the system where we have select() are legacies: it
>  it's not broken, don't fix it.
>



-- 
garnet:jasmin:beryllium:gluon
90-12264
90-B