Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:22:04 -0600 (CST) From: Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@americantv.com> To: cmsedore@maxwell.syr.edu, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Practical limit for number of TCP connections? Message-ID: <199912211522.JAA04702@free.pcs> In-Reply-To: <local.mail.freebsd-hackers/Pine.BSF.4.05.9912201950190.82375-100000@qwerty.maxwell.syr.edu> References: <local.mail.freebsd-hackers/19991220164517.F26743@sturm.canonware.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <local.mail.freebsd-hackers/Pine.BSF.4.05.9912201950190.82375-100000@qwerty.maxwell.syr.edu> you write: >In my case, load is reasonably distributed. Is poll() really that much >better than select()? I thought that, excepting bit flag manipulations, >it worked basically the same way on the kernel end. Yes, it is better. Select uses the same backend as poll(), but those "bit flag manipulations" that you are talking about consume a measurable amount of CPU time when you start throwing thousands of descriptors at it. -- Jonathan 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?199912211522.JAA04702>