Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 15:19:13 +0100 From: Igor Mozolevsky <igor@hybrid-lab.co.uk> To: Dirk Engling <erdgeist@erdgeist.org> Cc: Hackers freeBSD <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Daniel Janzon <janzon@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Best practice for accepting TCP connections on multicore? Message-ID: <CADWvR2gkeNaeVPizq_VubWhEHy3ywURJOdv9C=6PNybwYyFqRg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1406070252270.21531@erdgeist.org> References: <CAAGHsvDhaqQbwir5P%2BoaH_Qa8VZ0aj9A2SGrn%2B2shJMQ21B6Jw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1406070252270.21531@erdgeist.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 7 June 2014 01:53, Dirk Engling <erdgeist@erdgeist.org> wrote: > > On Sat, 7 Jun 2014, Daniel Janzon wrote: > > Is there any better way than doing the accept() call in one thread and >> then >> dispatch it to a thread on another core with any user space method? >> > See C10K problem [1]. Why use accept() and not kevent()? You need to keep it portable? > Has anyone rebutted the threads better than events paper[2] yet? 1. http://www.kegel.com/c10k.html 2. https://www.usenix.org/legacy/events/hotos03/tech/full_papers/vonbehren/vonbehren.pdf -- Igor M.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADWvR2gkeNaeVPizq_VubWhEHy3ywURJOdv9C=6PNybwYyFqRg>