On 11/1/06, Evgeniy Polyakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 06:20:43PM +0000, Oleg Verych ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > Hallo, Evgeniy Polyakov.Hello, Oleg. > On 2006-11-01, you wrote: > [] > >> Quantifying "how much more scalable" would be nice, as would be some > >> example where it is useful. ("It makes my webserver twice as fast on > >> monster 64-cpu box"). > > > > Trivial kevent web-server can handle 3960+ req/sec on Xeon 2.4Ghz with > [...] > > Seriously. I'm seeing that patches also. New, shiny, always ready "for > inclusion". But considering kernel (linux in this case) as not thing > for itself, i want to ask following question. > > Where's real-life application to do configure && make && make install? Your real life or mine as developer? I fortunately do not know anything about your real life, but my real life applications can be found on project's homepage. There is a link to archive there, where you can find plenty of sources. You likely do not know, but it is a bit risky business to patch all existing applications to show that approach is correct, if implementation is not completed. You likely do not know, but after I first time announced kevents in February I changed interfaces 4 times - and it is just interfaces, not including numerous features added/removed by developer's requests. > There were some comments about laking much of such programs, answers were > "was in prev. e-mail", "need to update them", something like that. > "Trivial web server" sources url, mentioned in benchmark isn't pointed > in patch advertisement. If it was, should i actually try that new > *trivial* wheel? Answer is trivial - there is archive where one can find a source code (filenames are posted regulary). Should I create a rpm? For what glibc version? > Saying that, i want to give you some short examples, i know. > *Linux kernel <-> userspace*: > o Alexey Kuznetsov networking <-> (excellent) iproute set of utilities; iproute documentation was way too bad when Alexey presented it first time :) > o Maxim Krasnyansky tun net driver <-> vtun daemon application; > > *Glibc with mister Drepper* has huge set of tests, please search for > `tst*' files in the sources. Btw, show me splice() 'shiny' application? Does lighttpd use it? Or move_pages(). > To make a little hint to you, Evgeniy, why don't you find a little > animal in the open source zoo to implement little interface to > proposed kernel subsystem and then show it to The Big Jury (not me), > we have here? And i can not see, how you've managed to implement > something like that having almost nothing on the test basket. > Very *suspicious* ch. There are always people who do not like something, what can I do with it? I present the code, we discuss it, I ask for inclusion (since it is the only way to get feedback), something requires changes, it is changed and so on - it is development process. I created 'little animal in the open source zoo' by myself to show how simple kevents are. > One, that comes in mind is lighthttpd <http://www.lighttpd.net/>. > It had sub-interface for event systems like select,poll,epoll, when i > checked its sources last time. And it is mature, btw. As I already told several times, I changed only interfaces 4 times already, since no one seems to know what we really want and how interface should look like.
Indesiciveness has certainly been an issue here, but I remember akpm and Ulrich both giving concrete suggestions. I was particularly interested in Andrew's request to explain and justify the differences between kevent and BSD's kqueue interface. Was there a discussion that I missed? I am very interested to see your work on this mechanism merged, because you've clearly emphasized performance and shown impressive results. But it seems like we lose out on a lot by throwing out all the applications that already use kqueue. NATE - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
