hanging on to open udp sockets.
Sun Nov 13 09:31:16 CET 2005
Unfortunatly no. The average load of this app, as a whole, will be
much, much higher then a few hundred per second. So I need to design
with scalabilty in mind from the ground up. I have implemented the
design I described, I will spend some time benchmarking it against a
couple of other methods. We will see what works best.
On 11/12/05, chandru <chandrashekhar.mullaparthi@REDACTED> wrote:
> On 12/11/05, Eric Merritt <cyberlync@REDACTED> wrote:
> > Hello All,
> > I have this requirement for a little app that sends udp datagrams to
> > another host. For the moment I just want to concentrate on the
> > sending. So I am assuming that I need to hold on to the open udp
> > socket after creation and reuse it as work comes in. This presupposes
> > a modest pool of worker processes. This in turn presupposes a
> > supervisor that watches this pool of processes and balances load
> > across them.
> For starters, I would just use one process to open the UDP socket and
> then use this process to send out all the UDP datagrams. This should
> be fast enough (in most cases - I'm assuming you have a modest load of
> a few hundred per second).
More information about the erlang-questions