Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 13:57:56 -0700 (MST) From: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> To: Brian Matthews <blm@actzero.com> Cc: "'nate@yogotech.com'" <nate@yogotech.com>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: Threads vs. blocking sockets Message-ID: <15043.41428.813769.449349@nomad.yogotech.com> In-Reply-To: <F0D64494733BD411BB9A00D0B74A0264021CA0@cpe-24-221-167-196.ca.sprintbbd.net> References: <F0D64494733BD411BB9A00D0B74A0264021CA0@cpe-24-221-167-196.ca.sprintbbd.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> | > Linux doesn't, and I don't think Solaris does (we just > | moved so I can't try > | > it now, but when I was investigating the problem I'm pretty > | sure I tried it > | > on our Sun box). > | Are you using non-blocking sockets, and are you using a user-space > | library on those OS's? (I suspect not, because when I last > | used Solaris it acted that way). > > In all my tests I was using blocking (at least from the application's > point-of-view) sockets. On Linux I used the standard pthreads library, which > is kernel-based, although the implementation of the threading library > should, hopefully, be irrelevant. It's certainly not irrelevant. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15043.41428.813769.449349>