Re: [PATCH] Naive approach to HTTP-timeouts (Final?)

Hi, Alexander.
First of all, test shows that _YAT_ approach works faster:
THREAD-VERSION : Time taken for tests:   4.688475 seconds
WITHOUT THREADS: Time taken for tests:   243.150797 seconds
But, to be honest, I don't beleive in it.
The only choice for it: patch occasionaly remove some bug or
perfomance bottleneck from sources.

And can you explain about expected perfomance degradation in YAT aproach.
Do you mean thread's swithing once at 20 seconds? I don't think so.
IMHO kernel switches between threads _realy_ fast, because threads
share the same address space, stack, code, etc.

I remember the time when kannel created new thread for every outgoing http
request. And even this worked pretty fast.

Alexander Malysh wrote:
> hey, factor 50???? I want see a patch w/o YAT!!!
> It can't be soooo bad... 
> 
> On Thursday 27 November 2003 17:24, David Schmitz wrote:
> 
>>Hi,
>>
>>your YAT-hatred ;) is well known and understood. See the attachment for
>>some naive benchmarks. Please draw your own conclusions.
>>
>>Regards,
>>David
>>
>>Alexander Malysh schrieb:
>>
>>>Hi David/Slava,
>>>
>>>as you know, I do not like "yet another thread" (YAT) approach...
>>>Would you please try get some benchmark results w/ and w/o YAT, so we can
>>>see how is performance w/o YAT affected?
>>>
>>>Thanks in advance...
>>>
>>>On Thursday 27 November 2003 15:02, David Schmitz wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hi list,
>>>>
>>>>attached is the IMHO final version of the timeout-patch.  I took the
>>>>thread-approach as discussed with Slava (thanks for your input and help
>>>>
>>>>:)). If there are no objections/corrections I would like to commit the
>>>>
>>>>patch.
>>>>
>>>>Note: configuration of the timeout-values is done in http.h.
>>>>
>>>>Best regards,
>>>>David
>>>
> 


-- 
Vjacheslav Chekushin                                mailto:[email protected]
Latvian Mobile Phone Company                        http://www.lmt.lv