On 10/11/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- QUOTE: Arno Garrels > This is untested code. Also FThreadList has to be > made public. Note that OnMessage would fire in > different thread contexts but a single handler for > all is fine. Hope this helps. > --- END. > > I'll look into it. > > > --- QUOTE: Arno Garrels > I think it isn't very fast, I tested once with some > stress clients and many concurrent connections > successfully over many hours until that point it > looked stable. In any case I won't use > multi-threading if not absolutely necessary, simply > because it's easier to code and to debug. > TWSocketServer can handle many hundreds of concurrent > connections in a single thread. > --- END. > > Then I'm wondering if I should use TWSocketServer > instead. Pardon my ignorance, as I haven't used the > server components before and generally ignore any > messages about them on this list, but would you (or > Francois) say that its performance is good while > handling potentially hundreds of concurrent > connections? In actually, I don't expect my service > application to serve more than 100 to 200 concurrent > connections (and that's in an extreme case, perhaps > once a month for a few hours). > > Thanks for all your help. > -dZ.
Hi, If you do not want the ability to use multi-cores for communication threads, then async is the way to go. But IMO, it is an ill design since chipmakers are talking about 64-core CPUs and 10Gbps networks. Best Regards, SZ -- To unsubscribe or change your settings for TWSocket mailing list please goto http://www.elists.org/mailman/listinfo/twsocket Visit our website at http://www.overbyte.be
