Marc, Henning,
thank you for the insight.
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Marc Espie  wrote:

quoted text
>

> On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 11:43:20AM +0200, Jonathan Schleifer wrote:

>  > "Edwin Eyan Moragas"  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