Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:24:33 +1000
From:      "Andrew Reilly" <areilly@nsw.bigpond.net.au>
To:        Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc:        ym g <ymg@graffiti.net>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Which applications are using kqueue ?
Message-ID:  <20000728092433.A12228@gurney.reilly.home>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0007271517400.34543-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>; from kris@FreeBSD.ORG on Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 03:24:27PM -0700
References:  <20000727143650.29162.qmail@graffiti.net> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0007271517400.34543-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 03:24:27PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, ym g wrote:
> > Are there plans for any apps like thin/fast [maybe in kernel]
> > webserver which uses kqueue
> 
> I've been tinkering with kq'ing thttpd - in fact I have it working (which
> was trivial), although it's not optimized yet so I don't expect major
> performance changes - thttpd is still querying each FD individually for
> status, instead of just using the next ones kq tells it about. I just need
> to figure out how to benchmark it effectively - httperf is running into
> client limitations so far.

The boa HTTP server might be as good a place to start too: it
doesn't fork either (except to run CGI scripts).  Actually, thttpd
sounds pretty similar.  I hadn't looked at it before.  Have you
compared them at all?

-- 
Andrew


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000728092433.A12228>