Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 29 Mar 2001 13:57:56 -0700 (MST)
From:      Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com>
To:        Brian Matthews <blm@actzero.com>
Cc:        "'nate@yogotech.com'" <nate@yogotech.com>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   RE: Threads vs. blocking sockets
Message-ID:  <15043.41428.813769.449349@nomad.yogotech.com>
In-Reply-To: <F0D64494733BD411BB9A00D0B74A0264021CA0@cpe-24-221-167-196.ca.sprintbbd.net>
References:  <F0D64494733BD411BB9A00D0B74A0264021CA0@cpe-24-221-167-196.ca.sprintbbd.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> | > Linux doesn't, and I don't think Solaris does (we just 
> | moved so I can't try
> | > it now, but when I was investigating the problem I'm pretty 
> | sure I tried it
> | > on our Sun box).
> | Are you using non-blocking sockets, and are you using a user-space
> | library on those OS's?  (I suspect not, because when I last 
> | used Solaris it acted that way).
> 
> In all my tests I was using blocking (at least from the application's
> point-of-view) sockets. On Linux I used the standard pthreads library, which
> is kernel-based, although the implementation of the threading library
> should, hopefully, be irrelevant.

It's certainly not irrelevant.



Nate

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15043.41428.813769.449349>