[MUD-Dev] Re: lurker emerges

[Ben Greear]

On Sun, 9 Aug 1998, Vadim Tkachenko wrote:

> T. Alexander Popiel wrote:
> 
> [skipped]
> 
> > You seem to assume that it is impossible for a single thread to keep
> > even one I/O device continuously busy.  Whatever happened to double-
> > buffering and non-blocking I/O?  Has that art actually been lost in
> > the annals of time?
> 
> I could be wrong, but I wish it rest in piece - it was a performance
> tuning nightmare. Either your I/O theread hogs all the resources looping
> idle, waiting for the input, or it lags because of the wrong priority
> set or bad timing.
> 
> For me, the blocking I/O and a possibility to interrupt it (exceptions)
> is a blessing.
> 
> Comments, anyone?

It'll be a cold day in Hell when I thread a c++ program, and so I dearly
love my non-blocking IO.  I see few multi-processor machines in my
immediate future, and even so, will probably opt to 'thread' at
the process level, think server-clustering or something :)

Ben

> 
> > - Alex
> 
> -- 
> Still alive and smile stays on,
> Vadim Tkachenko <vt at freehold.crocodile.org>
> --
> UNIX _is_ user friendly, he's just very picky about who his friends are
> 
> -- 
> MUD-Dev: Advancing an unrealised future.
> 


Ben Greear (greear at cyberhighway.net)  http://www.primenet.com/~greear 
Author of ScryMUD:  mud.primenet.com 4444
http://www.primenet.com/~greear/ScryMUD/scry.html