From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Sep 9 10:35:14 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mail1.its.rpi.edu (mail1.its.rpi.edu [128.113.100.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B5DF152B7 for ; Thu, 9 Sep 1999 10:35:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from drosih@rpi.edu) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.acs.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by mail1.its.rpi.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA54094; Thu, 9 Sep 1999 13:33:56 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: drosih@mail.rpi.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199909090144.SAA02454@rhapture.apple.com> References: <199909090144.SAA02454@rhapture.apple.com> Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 13:34:29 -0400 To: justin@apple.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG From: Garance A Drosihn Subject: Re: message queues for I/O (usenix paper) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 6:44 PM -0700 9/8/99, Justin C. Walker wrote: >From the FWIW department, we have, in the Darwin source, an >implementation of a "select replacement" that is designed to get >around some of the (perceived or real) issues with select(), e.g., >looking at a long (FD_SETSIZE or larger) array of bits several >times in the kernel and in user space. > >In the available sources, this is represented in sys/ev.h, and is >implemented only for sockets. Our tests indicate a roughly 5-10% >speed improvement when a lot of sockets are in use but not >exuberantly so. This sounds like it will be interesting. If this works out, would it translate to the other *BSD's fairly easily? When you say "select replacement", do you mean select disappears from the system, or just that this will be an alternative to using select? --- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or drosih@rpi.edu Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message