Re: Tidying up the deferred reads

On Tue, Oct 11, 2005, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:

> Interesting.
>
> Now if I only remembered how the deferred reads were solved in the
> epoll-2.5 branch so the two approaches can be compared..

heh. Quick perusal: the comm layer knows about held/resumed FDs.
In my code, the comm layer doesn't know. We kick the read resuming
at the same point (storeClientCopy3()). The epoll() patch doesn't
seem to require any changes to the store server side.

I prefer mine because there wouldn't be any extra code to maintain/check
the deferred fds. the epoll branch, however, does keep track of these FDs
and it lets him make sure FDs don't "disappear" because IO isn't registered
back for said FD.

> Reminder: The web pages is in CVS. Manual editing on the web server is not
> supported.

oops! :p I'll fix that up. Sorry!

adrian
Received on Mon Oct 10 2005 - 20:04:34 MDT