On 03:44 pm, exar...@divmod.com wrote:
On Wed, 8 Apr 2009 19:37:19 -0700, Alec Matusis
wrote:
Longer answer: Looks like maybe you want to contribute a patch for
this
ticket :)
http://twistedmatrix.com/trac/ticket/2234
I will look at this at some point (really swamped with work). But my
On Wed, 8 Apr 2009 19:37:19 -0700, Alec Matusis wrote:
Longer answer: Looks like maybe you want to contribute a patch for this
ticket :)
http://twistedmatrix.com/trac/ticket/2234
I will look at this at some point (really swamped with work). But my question
is: are you going to use pytho
nt: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 8:02 PM
> To: Twisted general discussion
> Subject: RE: [Twisted-Python] RE: Question about Descriptors and
> SelectReactor
>
>
> On 7 Apr, 06:17 pm, matu...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >>However I am using Linux. The Twisted documentation is recommendi
Hi Glyph and Folks:
AM>I would be actually quite curious to know the rationale of choosing
AM>select() over epoll() these days. epoll() scales like O(1) with the
AM>number of file descriptors, it is very performant, stable, and has no
AM>limitation on the overall number of fds on linux (except
On 7 Apr, 06:17 pm, matu...@yahoo.com wrote:
However I am using Linux. The Twisted documentation is recommending
that it may be better to use pollreactor
I would be actually quite curious to know the rationale of choosing
select()
over epoll() these days.
epoll() scales like O(1) with the nu
to:twisted-python-
> boun...@twistedmatrix.com] On Behalf Of Andrew Francis
> Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 10:13 AM
> To: twisted-python@twistedmatrix.com
> Subject: [Twisted-Python] RE: Question about Descriptors and
> SelectReactor
>
>
> Hi Alec and Drew:
>
> Thanks for
Hi Alec and Drew:
Thanks for answering my question. From reading an excerpt of Steven's "UNIX
Network Programming," it implies that the FD_SETSIZE is defined in the kernel.
If you want a bigger FD_SETSIZE, you need to recompile the kernel. At least
that is the case in BSD 4.4 UNIX.
However I
