From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS4713 221.184.0.0/13 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from neon.ruby-lang.org (neon.ruby-lang.org [221.186.184.75]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68E321F404 for ; Sun, 28 Jan 2018 14:09:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from neon.ruby-lang.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by neon.ruby-lang.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DC29120AC9; Sun, 28 Jan 2018 23:09:45 +0900 (JST) Received: from mail.atdot.net (ik1-326-23156.vs.sakura.ne.jp [153.126.180.160]) by neon.ruby-lang.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B769120AC7 for ; Sun, 28 Jan 2018 23:09:42 +0900 (JST) To: Ruby developers , Eric Wong References: <20180123173133.GB14355@starla> <20180124215113.GA29994@starla> <20180124220143.GA5600@80x24.org> From: Koichi Sasada Message-ID: Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 23:09:42 +0900 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180124220143.GA5600@80x24.org> Content-Language: en-US X-ML-Name: ruby-core X-Mail-Count: 85181 Subject: [ruby-core:85181] Re: [Ruby trunk Feature#13618][Assigned] [PATCH] auto fiber schedule for rb_wait_for_single_fd and rb_waitpid X-BeenThere: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Ruby developers List-Id: Ruby developers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: ruby-core-bounces@ruby-lang.org Sender: "ruby-core" On 2018/01/25 7:01, Eric Wong wrote: > For everything else that serves multiple clients in a single > process, fair sharing is preferable. Could you elaborate more? Generally, fairness is preferable. But I think we can document "we don't guarantee fairness scheduling on this feature", because our motivation is to provide a way to process multiple connections. Thoughts? Or dose it cause live-lock? (no-problem on server-client apps, but multi-agents programs seems to cause live locking) -- // SASADA Koichi at atdot dot net