Re: [iot-pmc] [CQ 8709] libuv Version: 0.11.29

[Roger Light <roger@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Julien,

Looks like you're right... I'm sure when I was researching it all ages
ago it had the A(synchronous), but I must be wrong. Just IOCP.

APR would be fine, but as you suggest it doesn't have the Windows
support that is needed.

Cheers,

Roger


On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Julien Vermillard <jvermillard@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I think It's called IOCP and not AIOCP I think (figured it after trying to
> googling around for AIOCP and always ended on mosquitto related messages).
>
> If you look at some alternative you can check APR: http://apr.apache.org/
> it's maybe not as fancy as libuv on windows (I never tried to bench it) but
> on Unix you have the raw power of epoll/kqueue.
>
>
>
> --
> Julien Vermillard :::: http://people.apache.org/~jvermillard/
>
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Roger Light <roger@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jens,
>>
>> Reading through this email again I'm worried the lists may make it
>> look unfriendly. This isn't the intention at all, I'm quite happy
>> discussing it.
>>
>> The practicality of the situation from my perspective is this:
>>
>> libuv is the only event library that currently provides useful Windows
>> support on the server side. By this I mean allowing >1000 connections
>> through the use of AIOCP..
>> libuv only provides source code, no binaries.
>> libuv is available in package repositories on Linux.
>> Nobody provides Windows binaries as far as I am aware.
>>
>> I think this leaves the following possibilities:
>>
>> Use libuv, distribute mosquitto+libuv binaries from Eclipse. Requires a
>> full CQ.
>> Use libuv, distribute mosquitto+libuv binaries from somewhere else.
>> Seems to be going against Eclipse Policy.
>> Use libuv, don't distribute any libuv binaries. This means that
>> Windows users would have to compile libuv themselves.
>> Don't use libuv. This means that mosquitto will remain a toy on Windows.
>>
>> The only ones that make sense to me are where the end user ends up
>> with all of the binaries that they need. That would mean either a full
>> CQ, or to go against Eclipse Policy. It would certainly make my life
>> easier not having to worry about providing installers, but I feel it's
>> something that should be done.
>>
>> It looks like future versions of libevent will support AIOCP on
>> Windows, but they've been working on it for at least 2.5 years already
>> without a stable release, so I'm not going to hold my breath. They
>> don't distribute binaries either, so the same problem would exist.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Roger
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Jens Reimann
>> <jens.reimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > just to get an idea about the current state of this CQ.
>> >
>> > So do you want to serve "libuv" from Eclipse servers? This would mean a
>> > normal CQ with code review, which Sharon sees problematic. But then we
>> > could close this discussion.
>> >
>> > Or you could simply decide not to distribute the bits from Eclipse
>> > servers. Neither for Linux, nor for Windows. So we would be back to the
>> > point of works with/pre-requisite.
>> >
>> > Maybe it would be good idea to have a look for an alternative C/C++
>> > socket library for Linux, MacOS and Windows that Eclipse IoT projects
>> > could use instead. But that would be another discussion then.
>> >
>> > Jens
>> >
>> > On 10/07/2014 03:42 PM, emo-ip-team@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> >> http://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8709
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Jens Reimann <jens.reimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed:
>> >>
>> >>            What    |Removed                     |Added
>> >>
>> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>                  CC|
>> >> |jens.reimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --- Comment #5 from Jens Reimann <jens.reimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >> 2014-10-07 09:42:57 ---
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> at the moment we have an unfinished discussion [1] which I wanted to
>> >> trigger
>> >> again at the same moment.
>> >>
>> >> To me it looks like the project does require distributing the library
>> >> from
>> >> Eclipse servers [1]. So it would not be a pre-requisite but a standard
>> >> CQ.
>> >>
>> >> [1] https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/iot-pmc/msg00154.html
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > iot-pmc mailing list
>> > iot-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> > To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
>> > from this list, visit
>> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/iot-pmc
>> _______________________________________________
>> iot-pmc mailing list
>> iot-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
>> from this list, visit
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/iot-pmc
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> iot-pmc mailing list
> iot-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
> this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/iot-pmc
>