Not sure why the go pipe doesn’t take a size for the inner channel to make the synchronous nature optional.
> On Nov 21, 2019, at 10:44 PM, Robert Engels <reng...@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > Sorry in reading the implementation of a pipe in Go, it may not have the > desired semantics, especially with a large write buffer since writes and > reads are 1 to 1 (very weird impl - this is not a traditional pipe). Dan’s > library is a better choice. > >> On Nov 21, 2019, at 10:37 PM, Robert Engels <reng...@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >> >> The OP specifically requested io.Reader/Writer interfaces. >> >> A pipe is what he wants. Not a ring buffer. (A pipe essentially has a ring >> buffer in the implementation though). >> >>>> On Nov 21, 2019, at 10:20 PM, Dan Kortschak <d...@kortschak.io> wrote: >>> >>> There is this: https://godoc.org/bitbucket.org/ausocean/utils/ring >>> >>> It has been used in production fairly extensively. >>> >>>>> On Thu, 2019-11-21 at 19:47 -0800, Marcin Romaszewicz wrote: >>>> Hi All, >>>> >>>> Before I reinvent the wheel, and because this wheel is particularly >>>> tricky >>>> to get right, I was wondering if anyone was aware of a a library >>>> providing >>>> something like this >>>> >>>> - conforms to io.Reader >>>> - conforms to io.Writer >>>> - Contains a buffer of fixed size, say, 64MB. If you try to write >>>> when the >>>> buffer is too full, write blocks. When you try to read from an empty >>>> one, >>>> read blocks. >>>> >>>> This describes the behavior of make(chan byte, 64 * MB), however, it >>>> doesn't seem to be efficient to do this with a channel. Say I'm >>>> transferring a few hundred GB via this mechanism. A chan of byte >>>> would need >>>> a few hundred billion byte writes, and a few hundred billion reads. >>>> Doesn't >>>> sound like it could be efficient at all. You can't implement this >>>> with a >>>> channel of []byte, because you'd violate your buffering limit if you >>>> pass >>>> too large of a byte array, so you'd have to chop things up into >>>> blocks, but >>>> maybe that's simpler than a full fledged blocking ring buffer. >>>> >>>> Anyhow, I've implemented such things in various OS level plumbing, so >>>> I >>>> know I can do it in Go much more easily, just hoping to avoid it :) >>>> >>>> Thanks for any advice, >>>> -- Marcin >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "golang-nuts" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>> email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/152a954eaa3eea02514e71bb142904480241ad6c.camel%40kortschak.io. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/16241014-EBD3-4232-8460-FEE735918ACB%40ix.netcom.com.
