Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 14 Sep 1999 14:31:47 -0400 (EDT) | From | Chuck Lever <> | Subject | Re: POSIX aio vs completion ports |
| |
On Mon, 13 Sep 1999, Jordan Mendelson wrote: > John Gardiner Myers wrote: > > > * Chuck Lever informs me that the signal queue might overflow, leading > > to lost completion notifications. There is no reasonable way for an > > application to recover from such a condition. > > As far as I know, on a queue overflow, SIGIO is raised and you can select() or > poll() on your fds. This of course is going to be exceptionally slow on a > large number of descriptors, but it shouldn't happen often.
i think that kind of design is completely unrealistic. you are most likely to run out of queue space when the server is overloaded. why then would you want to use a recovery mechanism that would just make the overload worse? the server is better off ignoring queue overflow.
- Chuck Lever -- corporate: <chuckl@netscape.com> personal: <chucklever@netscape.net> or <cel@monkey.org>
The Linux Scalability project: http://www.citi.umich.edu/projects/linux-scalability/
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |