02.01.2011 22:46, Sven Barth:
On 02.01.2011 18:16, Andrew Brunner wrote:
I'm really surprised that I come off as sounding pro any OS.
Personally, I'm the type of person to remove Windows 7 from my brand
new laptop just to run Ubuntu. I think there is though, some sort of
deep seeded resentment t
On 02.01.2011 18:16, Andrew Brunner wrote:
I'm really surprised that I come off as sounding pro any OS.
Personally, I'm the type of person to remove Windows 7 from my brand
new laptop just to run Ubuntu. I think there is though, some sort of
deep seeded resentment towards event driven methods.
On Sun, 2 Jan 2011, Andrew Brunner wrote:
I'm really surprised that I come off as sounding pro any OS.
Personally, I'm the type of person to remove Windows 7 from my brand
new laptop just to run Ubuntu. I think there is though, some sort of
deep seeded resentment towards event driven methods.
I'm really surprised that I come off as sounding pro any OS.
Personally, I'm the type of person to remove Windows 7 from my brand
new laptop just to run Ubuntu. I think there is though, some sort of
deep seeded resentment towards event driven methods.
So back to the topic... As it stands I do ha
On 02 Jan 2011, at 18:02, Andrew Brunner wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Jonas Maebe
> wrote:
>
>> Please move this discussion to the fpc-other list.
>
> If by "this" discussion you mean "his" discussion then great.
I mean "discussions about the superiority of one programming parad
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Jonas Maebe wrote:
> Please move this discussion to the fpc-other list.
If by "this" discussion you mean "his" discussion then great. I've
still got outstanding issues with SIGIO / SIGPOLL.
___
fpc-devel maillist -
On 02 Jan 2011, at 17:41, Henry Vermaak wrote:
> On 2 January 2011 15:26, Andrew Brunner wrote:
>> I also want to assert that ideal engineering principals, no matter
>> who/where they come from must be seriously considered with extreme
>> diligence as the lack of such is, at its core, the main r
On 2 January 2011 15:26, Andrew Brunner wrote:
> I also want to assert that ideal engineering principals, no matter
> who/where they come from must be seriously considered with extreme
> diligence as the lack of such is, at its core, the main reason why it
> has taken Linux so long to become widel
On 2 January 2011 15:06, Andrew Brunner wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 5:24 AM, Nikolai Zhubr wrote:
>> Formally yes maybe, but Andrew probably meant just avoiding some horrible
>> CPU-burning busy-loop.
>>
>> Despite of the similar name (epoll), substantial shortcomings of classical
>> polling
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 9:07 AM, Michael Van Canneyt
wrote:
> All webservers I know use polling on unix, and they are what you might call
> 'high availablility' environments.
There is a big difference between HA and HP :-) While they are
relationally proportional the cost of HA is minimized with
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 5:24 AM, Nikolai Zhubr wrote:
> Formally yes maybe, but Andrew probably meant just avoiding some horrible
> CPU-burning busy-loop.
>
> Despite of the similar name (epoll), substantial shortcomings of classical
> polling scheme are gone. Say, you need not use a timeout to be
On Sun, 2 Jan 2011, Andrew Brunner wrote:
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 4:43 AM, Michael Van Canneyt
wrote:
Do note that you're back to polling, which I understood you wanted to avoid
in the first place ?
Michael.
Sigh - yes, your right. I haven't given up on kernel level signals
(SIGIO/SIGPOLL
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 4:43 AM, Michael Van Canneyt
wrote:
> Do note that you're back to polling, which I understood you wanted to avoid
> in the first place ?
>
> Michael.
Sigh - yes, your right. I haven't given up on kernel level signals
(SIGIO/SIGPOLL) and random posts on various *nix forums
02.01.2011 13:43, Michael Van Canneyt:
On Sat, 1 Jan 2011, Andrew Brunner wrote:
Thanks, Nikolai. epoll looks like the silver bullet (for linux) and
very promising. I can dump a bunch of sockets into it and get the
kernel to let me know which ones get notifications for
reset/read/write.
...W
On Sat, 1 Jan 2011, Andrew Brunner wrote:
Thanks, Nikolai. epoll looks like the silver bullet (for linux) and
very promising. I can dump a bunch of sockets into it and get the
kernel to let me know which ones get notifications for
reset/read/write.
...Which is what I suggested in the first
Thanks Marco. I hope to get kqueue under darwin implemented shortly.
But Linux was after Windows. Apple can wait.
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
> In our previous episode, Andrew Brunner said:
>> proven methods under Linux. I wonder if epoll was ever brought into
>>
In our previous episode, Andrew Brunner said:
> proven methods under Linux. I wonder if epoll was ever brought into
> Darwin... I did notice Apple making a quiet exit out of the Server
> market.
As said, BSDs (and afaik Darwin too) use kqueue/kevent. (kevent is e.g. for
directory notifications).
Thanks, Nikolai. epoll looks like the silver bullet (for linux) and
very promising. I can dump a bunch of sockets into it and get the
kernel to let me know which ones get notifications for
reset/read/write.
But the abstraction is already accomplished in the foundational
abstracted network server
02.01.2011 2:51, Andrew Brunner:
Hi Nikolai,
I'm trying to build a cross platform *event* driven socket signaling
Ok, now its more clear :)
mechanism that does not employ polling algorithms.
Then use epoll (linux-specific invention, BSDs have kqueue instead).
There is no exact match between
In our previous episode, Andrew Brunner said:
> on Windows. You wanna sit here and tell me it can't / isn't to be
> done with LINUX!?!
Aw, that got away to soon. Anyway, the question has come up before (recently
even), and afaik nobody came up with anything but select(), and
epoll(Linux)/kqueue
> On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 5:45 PM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
> My guess is that he is desperately trying all straws to find something that
> matches the application model of his existing app, which is Windows centric.
Also, it should be pointed out, that the existing mechanism (which is
commented
In our previous episode, Andrew Brunner said:
> You wanna sit here and tell me it can't / isn't to be
> done with LINUX!?!
Of course. Networking is FreeBSD's domain :_)
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 5:45 PM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
>
> My guess is that he is desperately trying all straws to find something that
> matches the application model of his existing app, which is Windows centric.
I am exploring all options to switch to the most effective form for
handling hig
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 5:39 PM, Nikolai Zhubr wrote:
> What are you trying to achieve ultimately? People tend to avoid using
> signals as much as possible nowadays (for anything beyond some nice handling
> of forced/fatal program termination and such) at least on linux. I'm not
> guru, just somewh
In our previous episode, Nikolai Zhubr said:
> [...]
>
> What are you trying to achieve ultimately? People tend to avoid using
> signals as much as possible nowadays (for anything beyond some nice
> handling of forced/fatal program termination and such) at least on
> linux. I'm not guru, just s
01.01.2011 20:27, Andrew Brunner:
I'm trying to get signals to work with sockets under x64 Ubuntu 10.10
(all updates)
I installed two handlers for two events SIGIO, and SIGHUP uising
fpsigaction(SIGIO, @saAct, nil) . I was expecting to get a byte by
byte signal under telnet to my server instanc
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
> In our previous episode, Andrew Brunner said:
>> Another important thing is that (IMO) the data structure for
>> TSigAction is out-dated.
>
>> Please refer to rtl/linux/signal.inc and compare the struct with the
>> one specified at the U
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Mark Morgan Lloyd
wrote:
>
> I am neither a kernel hacker nor a network guru, but would a signal be
> raised when a byte was read or when a TCP packet- possibly comprising
> aggregated bytes- was transferred? I think you'd be better not using a
> standard telnet cl
In our previous episode, Andrew Brunner said:
> Another important thing is that (IMO) the data structure for
> TSigAction is out-dated.
> Please refer to rtl/linux/signal.inc and compare the struct with the
> one specified at the URL I included for linux... The two structs are
> different.
>
> h
Andrew Brunner wrote:
I'm trying to get signals to work with sockets under x64 Ubuntu 10.10
(all updates)
I installed two handlers for two events SIGIO, and SIGHUP uising
fpsigaction(SIGIO, @saAct, nil) . I was expecting to get a byte by
byte signal under telnet to my server instance (110-pop3)
I'm trying to get signals to work with sockets under x64 Ubuntu 10.10
(all updates)
I installed two handlers for two events SIGIO, and SIGHUP uising
fpsigaction(SIGIO, @saAct, nil) . I was expecting to get a byte by
byte signal under telnet to my server instance (110-pop3) on the IO
but had only
31 matches
Mail list logo
