Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 18:11:22 -0500 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@sneakerz.org> To: "E.B. Dreger" <eddy+public+spam@noc.everquick.net> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: question: aio / nbio / kqueue Message-ID: <20010622181122.A57058@sneakerz.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.20.0106222258500.12615-100000@www.everquick.net>; from eddy%2Bpublic%2Bspam@noc.everquick.net on Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 11:01:44PM %2B0000 References: <Pine.LNX.4.20.0106222258500.12615-100000@www.everquick.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* E.B. Dreger <eddy+public+spam@noc.everquick.net> [010622 18:01] wrote: > Quick question, hopefully not too basic for this list: > > AIO vs. non-blocking IO vs. kernel queues > > I'm familiar with (and *love*) kernel queues. Non-blocking IO is > straightforward. AIO seems simple enough. > > My question is, from a performance standpoint, in what situations are > these techniques most appropriate? kqueue can be utilized to monitor non-blocking and AIO, you probably want to use non-blocking for network/tty IO and AIO for disk IO, you also probably want to use kqueue for notification when these operations complete or will be possible without blocking. -Alfred 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?20010622181122.A57058>