On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 04:17:20PM -0700, Scott Lamb wrote:
> On Sep 8, 2006, at 12:13 PM, William Ahern wrote:
> >Ah. I was approaching it from another angle (one thread per event
> >loop, and
> >the question being how to inject events and balance events into
> >each event
> >loop).
>
> Like
On Sep 8, 2006, at 12:13 PM, William Ahern wrote:
Ah. I was approaching it from another angle (one thread per event
loop, and
the question being how to inject events and balance events into
each event
loop).
Like the first thing I described? Have you actually done this and had
any luck wi
On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 10:18:11AM -0700, Scott Lamb wrote:
> At a high level, I think it would require the basic poll algorithm to
> be:
>
> lock
> loop:
> while there are events:
> dequeue one
> unlock
> handle it
> lock
>
On Sep 8, 2006, at 10:18 AM, Scott Lamb wrote:
lock
loop:
while there are events:
dequeue one
unlock
handle it
lock
if someThreadPolling:
condition wait
else:
someThreadPolling = true
On Sep 7, 2006, at 11:49 PM, William Ahern wrote:
On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 11:29:50PM -0700, Scott Lamb wrote:
I think libevent's current multithreaded behavior is not terribly
useful:
1. You can't safely share a single event_base among a pool of
threads. This is actually what I'd like to do wit
