Author neologix
Recipients Erez.Sh, William.Edwards, asksol, danken, dmalcolm, giampaolo.rodola, jnoller, neologix, pitrou, sbt, synapse, vstinner
Date 2012-10-23.07:38:30
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <CAH_1eM2qykdNH65_vuBg8NQTBUVrj78R-Q+njmQg_+tGkLWrsA@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to <1350939736.46.0.967163442656.issue10527@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
>> This problem affects any single use of select(): instead of using an
>> ad-hoc wrapper in each module, it would probably make sense to add a
>> higher level selector class to the select module which would fallback on
>> the right syscall (i.e. poll() if available, or /dev/poll on Solaris-
>> like).
>
> Doesn't Solaris have poll()?  If so then I don't see why one would want to use /dev/poll in the single fd case.

Because it offers better performance than poll(): you don't have to
keep passing the FD at each syscall (note that I'm not talking about
the signal FD case, but about a generic polling API).

Also note that microbenchmarks with one FD isn't really meaningful,
since in real life the FD won't be ready at least part of the time:
like Antoine, I think that worrying about performance impact is really
a premature optimization (unless real benchmarks prove otherwise).
History
Date User Action Args
2012-10-23 07:38:30neologixsetrecipients: + neologix, pitrou, vstinner, giampaolo.rodola, jnoller, synapse, asksol, dmalcolm, danken, Erez.Sh, sbt, William.Edwards
2012-10-23 07:38:30neologixlinkissue10527 messages
2012-10-23 07:38:30neologixcreate