[Pharo-project] #& in Socket >> #waitForSendDoneFor:
bschwab at anest.ufl.edu
Tue Nov 9 07:58:56 CET 2010
What does your patch do? At a minimum, it deserves a little attention. Things that come to mind are that one version does less work due to some type of optimization (and runs faster as a result) or that one is too quick to detect a loss of connection and sends less data per opportunity, appearing to run slower as a result.
Can you elaborate on "I'm able to push about 1 Mbyte/s more"? I guess I'm asking how that manifests itself? Are there a bunch of connections that form, send and fail? Do they each get a little farther or do they go faster?
Also, my standard objection to timeouts enters into this. IMHO, the socket should do what it is asked to do, blocking only the calling thread, and let other threads and/or the user decide when that is taking too long. Could you be getting timeouts that are causing unexpected behavior?
From: pharo-project-bounces at lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-bounces at lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Philippe Marschall [kustos at gmx.net]
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 1:11 AM
To: pharo-project at lists.gforge.inria.fr
Subject: [Pharo-project] #& in Socket >> #waitForSendDoneFor:
I have a case where the #& in Socket >> #waitForSendDoneFor: shows up in
a tally (see attachment). I'm able to push about 1 Mbyte/s more when I
replace that with #and:. So my question is this really needed or should
I file a bug and send a patch?
This is Pharo 1.1.1 BTW.
More information about the Pharo-project