Re: [boost] Re: Asynchronicity (long)

On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 09:14 -0500, Edward Diener wrote:
Boris wrote:
1) No one normally uses 1000 sockets. Be real rather than hyperbolic if you are trying to make a point.
Sorry, but that is a bad assumption. A server that I'm currently working on will have 1,000's of sockets open concurrently. Application gateways, web servers and database connection concentrators are typical of Apps that often need large numbers of sockets. /ikh

On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 16:15:29 +0100, Iain Hanson <Iain.Hanson@videonetworks.com> wrote:
1) No one normally uses 1000 sockets. Be real rather than hyperbolic if you are trying to make a point.
Sorry, but that is a bad assumption. A server that I'm currently working on will have 1,000's of sockets open concurrently. Application gateways, web servers and database connection concentrators are typical of Apps that often need large numbers of sockets.
I agree. For example, a VoIP softswitch can have as much as 4 open sockets per call: 2 sockets for H.225, 2 for H.245. A 1000 of concurrent calls is no big deal for a typical softswitch. An application server I'm working on right now also handles thousands connections. By the way, we use libevent and are happy with it. It's portable (Linux/Windows) and has very simple interface. I just don't see a need for the stuff you guys are discussing here. -- Maxim Yegorushkin
participants (2)
-
Iain Hanson
-
Maxim Yegorushkin