From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Apr 30 17:36:32 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 387EF37B43C for ; Mon, 30 Apr 2001 17:36:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bright@fw.wintelcom.net) Received: (from bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id f410Zu827779; Mon, 30 Apr 2001 17:35:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 17:35:56 -0700 From: "'Alfred Perlstein'" To: Charles Randall Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=AAL=AD^=B6W?= , Freebsd-Hackers Subject: Re: write() vs aio_write() Message-ID: <20010430173555.H18676@fw.wintelcom.net> References: <5FE9B713CCCDD311A03400508B8B30130828EC88@bdr-xcln.corp.matchlogic.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <5FE9B713CCCDD311A03400508B8B30130828EC88@bdr-xcln.corp.matchlogic.com>; from crandall@matchlogic.com on Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 11:24:42AM -0600 X-all-your-base: are belong to us. Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * Charles Randall [010430 10:26] wrote: > Regarding aio_*, Alfred Perlstein writes: > >It's a good idea to use it for disk IO, probably not a good > >idea for network IO. > > Could you elaborate? Sure. Network IO can be done without blocking (unless you take a fault on the source address of your data). Hence the additional context switching required by aio is not needed. Disk IO probably stands a good chance of blocking your application, if you can offload that blocking to a kernel thread you should be able to continue serving content. -- -Alfred Perlstein - [alfred@freebsd.org] Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology," start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message