More recently, a *completely separate* approach to
multi-threading - multi-threaded epoll - has been getting some
attention. Here's what I see as the pros and cons of this new approach.
You forgot:
CON: epoll is Linux specific and code using it is not easily portable.
Excellent point.
Jeff Darcy jda...@redhat.com wrote:
More recently, a *completely separate* approach to
multi-threading - multi-threaded epoll - has been getting some
attention. Here's what I see as the pros and cons of this new approach.
You forgot:
CON: epoll is Linux specific and code using it is not
In the last few days, I've run into a couple of misunderstandings about
the status of some projects I've worked on. At first I set out to
correct those misunderstandings, but then I realized it wouldn't be a
bad idea to keep posting status to this llist periodically. Can't hurt,
anyway. This is
On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 16:20 -0400, Jeff Darcy wrote:
In the last few days, I've run into a couple of misunderstandings about
the status of some projects I've worked on. At first I set out to
correct those misunderstandings, but then I realized it wouldn't be a
bad idea to keep posting status
I might be misunderstanding some of this, but I thought that the way
of doing SSL (as you say, two years ago), and the mechanism, the
generation and transferring of certificates, and so on, was going to
be updated with a new mechanism in 3.6...?
SSL was updated in a couple of ways for 3.6:
