[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: gfile-based file notifications are not immediate

From: Perry E. Metzger
Subject: Re: gfile-based file notifications are not immediate
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2014 10:50:59 -0500

On Sun, 2 Nov 2014 09:15:32 -0500 Noam Postavsky
<address@hidden> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Perry E. Metzger
> <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 21:32:30 +0100 RĂ¼diger Sonderfeld
> > <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> Glib already seems to use several hacks to work around the
> >> limitations of kqueue
> >
> > As a aside: people keep mentioning that they believe kqueue has
> > some sort of fundamental limitations. I'm curious what those are
> > perceived to be. So far as I can tell, the interface is fine --
> > it is a rough equivalent to what you can do in Linux with epoll
> > (which is currently preferred over select and its successors).
> I don't know the details, but I gathered the limitations are
> relative to *inotify*. Presumably epoll would also be a poor
> substitute for inotify, which is why Linux has both.

epoll and inotify are orthogonal. epoll says when a file descriptor
has data on it. inotify provides a file descriptor that yields event
information for file changes.

kqueue implements features of both select/poll and inotify. I'm not
sure what limitations kqueue might have vs. inotify, but they are
unlikely to be significant in this context.

Perry E. Metzger                address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]