Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 14 Sep 1999 22:07:05 +0300 | From | "Momchil 'Velco' Velikov" <> | Subject | Re: POSIX aio vs completion ports |
| |
Chuck Lever wrote: > > 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?
You can at least try to handle bursts.
Regards, -velco
- 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/
| |