On Tue, 13 May 2008 11:50:30 -0700 (PDT), Giampaolo Rodola' <gnewsg@gmail.c omwrote:
I'm not sure this is right. What timeout are we talking about? Twisted
only wakes up when necessary.
Jean-Paul
>On 13 Mag, 17:59, Josiah Carlson <josiah.carl... @gmail.comwrote :
>
>
>Good point. I'd like to ask a question: if we'd have a default
>asyncore.loo p timeout of (say) 0.01 ms instead of 30 could we avoid
>such problem?
>I've always found weird that asyncore has such an high default timeout
>value.
>Twisted, for example, uses a default of 0.01 ms for all its reactors.
>
>We do not live in a pure world, Python isn't pure (practicality beats
>purity), and by attempting to send some data each time a .push*()
>method is called, there are measurable increases in transfer rates.
>purity), and by attempting to send some data each time a .push*()
>method is called, there are measurable increases in transfer rates.
>Good point. I'd like to ask a question: if we'd have a default
>asyncore.loo p timeout of (say) 0.01 ms instead of 30 could we avoid
>such problem?
>I've always found weird that asyncore has such an high default timeout
>value.
>Twisted, for example, uses a default of 0.01 ms for all its reactors.
only wakes up when necessary.
Jean-Paul
Comment