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

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

On Sun, Nov 14, 2004 at 09:04:04PM -0800, Howard Chu wrote:
> Been there... I haven't been motivated to investigate poll() because it 
> really doesn't offer any scaling benefits vs select(). 

So can I take this as a 'no' for this patch?

> As for /dev/poll and epoll() - they sound nice, but I don't want to get too
> bogged down in OS-specific special cases. I guess a decent abstraction layer
> above it would be OK, but I definitely don't want to see a lot of #ifdef
> HAVE_DEVPOLL/HAVE_EPOLL junk littered all over daemon.c.

The slapd_add/remove and set_write & friends already should roughly map to at
least epoll() on Linux. I don't know about /dev/poll. It would only be
necessary to re-write the loops over readers and writers. Maybe with a
first_reader/next_reader style interface? This might work for select/poll as
well as epoll.


Attachment: pgp0MzecvSIT0.pgp
Description: PGP signature