Commits on Source (2)
-
Eric S. Raymond authored
We still need to deal with HAVE_IO_COMPLETION_PORT.
ec175570 -
Eric S. Raymond authored
In theory this general approach might have worked on. e.g., Solaris 10 and AIX. In practice the handler code was Windows only, and there are good reasons not to do it this way. First, it's not clear asynchronous I/O is any win at all under modern conditions. The disadvantage is that it's a complexity and defect attractor; the advantage is reducing average latency and jitter due to processing time in a synchronous I/O loop. In past times, with slower processors, this was a serious issue. But in 2016 we know from field experience that synchronous I/O produces good NTP performance on Unix systems that don't do asynchronous I/O. Thus, it can be dropped. If the standards for "good performance" rise to the point where we want asynchronous I/O again, the right way to do it will not with an OS-specific extension but with POSIX threads or some other portable mechanism.
950f8390