On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 11:26 AM, William Allen Simpson
wrote:
> On 7/21/17 11:17 AM, Matt Benjamin wrote:
>>
>> As we discussed Wed., I'd like to see something like a msg counter and
>> byte counter that induced switching to the next handle. This seems
>> consistent w/the front or back queuing i
On 7/21/17 11:17 AM, Matt Benjamin wrote:
As we discussed Wed., I'd like to see something like a msg counter and
byte counter that induced switching to the next handle. This seems
consistent w/the front or back queuing idea Dan proposed.
I don't understand this comment. We already have the
As we discussed Wed., I'd like to see something like a msg counter and
byte counter that induced switching to the next handle. This seems
consistent w/the front or back queuing idea Dan proposed. The
existing lookahead logic knows when we have reads or writes, but
doesn't know how much we read, w
My current Napalm code essentially gives the following priorities:
New UDP, TCP, RDMA, or 9P connections are the "same" priority, as
they each have their own channel, and they each have a dedicated
epoll thread.
The only limit is the OS runs out of file descriptors and rejects
the connection att
