[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [libmicrohttpd] Question on Async support

From: Christian Grothoff
Subject: Re: [libmicrohttpd] Question on Async support
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 01:58:10 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1

On 08/23/2018 09:09 PM, Santos Das wrote:
> Hi,
> Thanks a lot. Is there any significant performance impact when it runs
> in this mode ?

Not inherently, but you don't get the thread-pool feature that way (at
least not without quite a bit of work by you!).  My real
high-performance setups use the thread pool (because my application
logic requires some CPU time, not so much for MHD), but of course you
could hack up your own.  But just FYI: that's not trivial.

> Has anyone compared its performance against "mongoose " ?

I'm not aware of a direct 1:1 comparison, but as I said, it is very hard
to benchmark the HTTP logic itself.

> I''m evaluating a http library for my C++ based application
> microservices .  I am evaluating libraries that can provide our C++
> workers with native HTTP capabilities. 
> I’m defining native as:
>   * No additional threads other than those spawned by the application
>     when it chooses to use blocking calls (entirely optional)
>   * No additional queueing
>   * Native sockets interface with full use of listen, accept, bind,
>     connect, recv, send.
> Do you think libmicrohttpd is the best choice or is there any better
> alternatives for me ?

Well, we have a list of alternatives on the MHD web site. But naturally
few people on this list would think they are as useful for _their_
usecases. ;-)

Note that there is some C++ wrapper around MHD here:

But I don't know if it is any good (never tried).

Happy hacking!


reply via email to

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