[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: >1024 connections in slapd / select->poll

To: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
Subject: Re: >1024 connections in slapd / select->poll
From: Volker.Lendecke@SerNet.DE
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:16:44 +0100
Cc: openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org
Content-disposition: inline
In-reply-to: <6.1.2.0.0.20041115134606.02efcfe8@127.0.0.1>
Organization: Service Network GmbH, Goettingen, Germany
References: <E1CTHSr-00070q-00@intern.SerNet.DE> <6.1.2.0.0.20041114080256.0302f980@127.0.0.1> <E1CTL5g-0003KG-00@intern.SerNet.DE> <Pine.GSO.4.61.0411142243020.3958@jupiter.portbridge.com> <419838C4.6050709@symas.com> <E1CTfj7-0006Zc-00@intern.SerNet.DE> <6.1.2.0.0.20041115134606.02efcfe8@127.0.0.1>
User-agent: Mutt/1.4i

On Mon, Nov 15, 2004 at 02:17:55PM -0800, Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote:
> Two areas concern me about the use of poll(2) are interaction with threads and
> performance.  The former is basically fear of the unknown.  We might find that

add_pollfd and del_pollfd need to be protected by a lock/mutex. Are the callers
themselves protected?

Volker

Attachment: pgpYWs6QJOcTJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

References:
- >1024 connections in slapd / select->poll
  - From: Volker Lendecke <Volker.Lendecke@SerNet.DE>
- Re: >1024 connections in slapd / select->poll
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
- Re: >1024 connections in slapd / select->poll
  - From: Volker.Lendecke@SerNet.DE
- Re: >1024 connections in slapd / select->poll
  - From: Igor Brezac <igor@ipass.net>
- Re: >1024 connections in slapd / select->poll
  - From: Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>
- Re: >1024 connections in slapd / select->poll
  - From: Volker.Lendecke@SerNet.DE
- Re: >1024 connections in slapd / select->poll
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>

Prev by Date: Re: >1024 connections in slapd / select->poll
Next by Date: Re: >1024 connections in slapd / select->poll
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread