Re: new patch & new ideas (squid+epoll)

Just wondering if this belongs to Bug #796
<url:http://www.squid-cache.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=796>. If it does
please attache the patch there and write a comment. Don't forget to get
the attributions correct if the patch is not uploaded by the author.

Regards
Henrik

> > On Thu, 6 Nov 2003, David Nicklay wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>I finally took some time to test this. Gonzalo's patch seems to address
> >> a lot of outstanding issues with comm_epoll including:
> >>
> >>- CPU usage problem w/ idle clients (both local and remote)
> >>- epoll kernel table being out of sync with fde table
> >>- missed epoll table updates (happens on my boxes but not Gonzalo's)
> >>
> >>Could someone apply this to the squid-3.0 HEAD?
> >>
> >>Kudos to Gonzalo.
> >>
> >>
> >>>Gonzalo Arana wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>>(yes, it's me again :-( ).
> >>>>
> >>>>I have this new patch which
> >>>>
> >>>>1) issues epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_(ADD|MOD|DEL)) according to handler ==
> >>>>NULL or not AND based also on past epoll monitoring state (in
> >>>>commSetSelect).
> >>>>
> >>>>2) does some profiling in case it was defined on compile time
> >>>>(PROF_(start|stop) ), and statistics counters are updated (haven't been
> >>>>checked).
> >>>>
> >>>>3) removes interest when no handler is defined for event (but
> >>>>read_pending is set if applies)
> >>>>
> >>>>4) returns COMM_TIMEOUT when no event has been detected
> >>>>
> >>>>Last 2 'features' were already in my original patch.
> >>>>
> >>>>BTW, I got 100% CPU problem when web client (wget) is run on the same
> >>>>machine where squid does. Running wget in other machine, gives me less
> >>>>than 40% of CPU usage.
> >>>>
> >>>>Hope this solves/explains the behaviour you had been having (english is
> >>>>not my native language, so sorry if 'had been having' is not correct)
> >>>>about CPU usage.
> >>>>
> >>>>I'm posting this to you since you are the original author of
> >>>>comm_epoll.cc, and I don't want to add noise to squid devel-list.
> >>>>
> >>>>Thank you very much in advance,
Received on Fri Nov 07 2003 - 10:53:17 MST