Hi Chris, On 10/24/06, Christopher Kohlhoff <chris@kohlhoff.com> wrote:
Dean Michael Berris wrote:
Although we use thread locking primitives even on the active objects (which I thought were necessary without using strands).
One of my design goals is that library users shouldn't generally need to use any thread locking primitives at all. If you have a single thread calling io_service::run(), and always use io_service::post() to post work into the active object's thread, then no locking is required.
I understand, however the active object had to access a resource (a file) by appending information to it. We have not yet refactored the solution to use a strand for each function call to the write, and I believe that's the better approach.
Did you have explicit thread locking when you tried a single io_service with a pool of threads? That could certainly impact performance negatively.
Actually, we tried it on the multiple io_service solution, and the results are pretty impressive. Though I think it should be better if we just used a single io_service with a thread pool calling io_service::run and used strands for each call to the critical function calls. Thanks, this is another TODO in our list to further improve the performance of the system. I will definitely let you know what happens with that approach over the multiple io_service version. -- Dean Michael C. Berris C++ Software Architect Orange and Bronze Software Labs, Ltd. Co. web: http://software.orangeandbronze.com/ email: dean@orangeandbronze.com mobile: +63 928 7291459 phone: +63 2 8943415 other: +1 408 4049532 blogs: http://mikhailberis.blogspot.com http://3w-agility.blogspot.com http://cplusplus-soup.blogspot.com