Re: regarding timeout/untimeout kernel functions

From: Dan Nelson (dnelson_at_allantgroup.com)
Date: 07/23/04

  • Next message: Bruce R. Montague: "Re: "Next Generation" kernel configuration?" 
    Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 21:56:00 -0500
To: pradeep reddy punnam <prady_p@yahoo.com>

    In the last episode (Jul 22), pradeep reddy punnam said:
    > i thought of threading with select before , but i belive that if
    > the number of timers to be checked increases the number of the
    > threads to be maintained increses,so the process may become very
    > hevy. what do u think.

    Threads are very lightweight. You should be able to create hundreds of
    (mostly-sleeping) threads with no problem. You wouldn't even need to
    use select; just sleep (or nanosleep).
     
    > i think ultimatley i am going to use the above thing. but in the
    > process of my search i came across the timeout kernel function
    > implemenation but i can not use that ( which i belive very efficient
    > implementation of timers ), which user can not able to use it , so i
    > just want to discuss it .

    You could also use the kqueue/kevent functions to queue up an arbitrary
    number of timer events in a single process. 

    -- 
	Dan Nelson
	dnelson@allantgroup.com
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
  • Next message: Bruce R. Montague: "Re: "Next Generation" kernel configuration?"