Sunny, That's what I'm going to look into next. First I wanted to see if there was a way of upping the buffer at an OS level. I did some research and found that by default Suse sets the receive buffer to 112640 (and this gets doubled to 225280). Which really isn't a lot. I have up'd this and seen improved performance.
The next thing I'm going to do is look into queues. If I was going to do this on Windows I would probably put it into a MSMQ. Do you or anyone else know of something I can use under linux? Regards, Marcus Quoting Sunny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Apr 4, 2005 4:39 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Some more information: > > > > It seems my testing was slightly incorrect. I still think there is a > problem but > > not with mono. When I did my initial testing I used a program on one > machine to > > send 51000 messages on a broadcast group. I then had two programs running, > the > > first was the C program and the second was the c# program. When I checked > the > > results I checked the output of the C program (the file that was generated) > and > > the count of messages generated by the c# program. I accidentally checked > the > > input file instead of the output file and thus thought the C program wasn't > > missing any messages. However, after running the test several more times I > have > > discovered that the C program is actually missing data, probably more data > than > > the c# program. This is to be expected as the C program is doing a lot more > > work. So I think I can safely say that c# and mono on linux is just as bad > as C > > :) > > > > However, the interesting thing is that running the same C program on > Unixware > > (and i'm doubly sure) doesn't miss a message. Infact on Unixware it seems > to > > buffer the messages automatically. I can see that when the sending process > > finishes the C program is still receiving and keeps receiving for about > 1min > > 45secs. > > > > So I'm off to investigate the differences between Linux (Suse 9.2 Pro) and > > Unixware. > > > > Thanks Jason for replying!! > > > > Kind regards, > > Marcus > > Hi Marcus, > If I had to deal with it, I'll put all the processing in a separate > thread, or will use async invocation (using the thread pool to save > cycles not creating my own threads) to deal with the input, thus > freeing the receiving loop only to get the data. > > Sunny > -- > Get Firefox > http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?q=affiliates&id=10745&t=85 > _______________________________________________ > Mono-devel-list mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list > Regards, Marcus _______________________________________________ Mono-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
