Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 11:11:09 +0100 From: David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie> To: Michel Oosterhof <m.oosterhof@xs4all.nl> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kqueue Message-ID: <20020925101109.GA46927@walton.maths.tcd.ie> In-Reply-To: <20020925081253.GA98975@xs4all.nl> References: <20020925081253.GA98975@xs4all.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 10:12:53AM +0200, Michel Oosterhof wrote: > I've got one more question, actually a fact that surprises me, it > seems that tail(1) is the only place in the base system that actually > uses kqueue. It is also used in libc for the DNS resolver. > Is there a reason for this? I read in most places > kqueue() is more efficient, scalable, etc. Probably lack of time to convert more programs. I suspect that inetd or syslogd might benefit from kqueueing, but I guess the real gains would be in applications like apache. David. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020925101109.GA46927>