Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    comp.protocols.tcp-ip    |    TCP and IP network protocols.    |    14,669 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 12,916 of 14,669    |
|    reppisch to All    |
|    Re: epoll vs select. Was: maximum allowa    |
|    04 Jun 09 15:14:49    |
      From: spam@reppisch.de              Hi Ng,                     i've further investigated on this latency problem.       The test-client has 10 threads each of which opening a connection to the       server and doing blocking io (send/recv pingpong).              It seems that 2 out of 100k messages over all threads were about 6       seconds "in transit".       Time was measured between message assembly & send() to dequeueing from       the recveive buffer.              Meanwhile other sockets did perform properly. (typical 0,5 ms in transit).       Any ideas on that? Packet loss? Socket observing bug?              Should i take control of the stack's behaviour about sending data in       more "real-Time"?       I've set the SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF/SO_RCVBUF Buffers to 65k for       negotiating the "bigger window extension".       Maybe i could try to disable Nagle, but in my opinion the stack should       not have to be tweaked.              Regards,               Michael              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca