login
Header Space

 
 

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

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <misc@...>
Date: Monday, April 21, 2008 - 10:43 am

On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 02:31:26PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:

I spent a lot of time doing libevent stuff for a work project the last
few weeks and I am in love with the API.  One negative is the poor
documentation; especially the buffered events docs are inadequate.

Yes, I read the source :-)  but it would have been a little less painful
to have a slightly better man page and some standalone examples.

Negatives aside once you figure it out it allows one to write code that
doesn't require threading and other complexity inducing stuff.  Yay
finite state machines!
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)
speck-geostationary