.\" ========================================================================
.\"
.IX Title "EV 1"
-.TH EV 1 "2007-12-21" "perl v5.8.8" "User Contributed Perl Documentation"
+.TH EV 1 "2007-12-22" "perl v5.8.8" "User Contributed Perl Documentation"
.SH "NAME"
libev \- a high performance full\-featured event loop written in C
.SH "SYNOPSIS"
Returns the current time as libev would use it. Please note that the
\&\f(CW\*(C`ev_now\*(C'\fR function is usually faster and also often returns the timestamp
you actually want to know.
+.IP "ev_sleep (ev_tstamp interval)" 4
+.IX Item "ev_sleep (ev_tstamp interval)"
+Sleep for the given interval: The current thread will be blocked until
+either it is interrupted or the given time interval has passed. Basically
+this is a subsecond-resolution \f(CW\*(C`sleep ()\*(C'\fR.
.IP "int ev_version_major ()" 4
.IX Item "int ev_version_major ()"
.PD 0
This is your standard \fIselect\fR\|(2) backend. Not \fIcompletely\fR standard, as
libev tries to roll its own fd_set with no limits on the number of fds,
but if that fails, expect a fairly low limit on the number of fds when
-using this backend. It doesn't scale too well (O(highest_fd)), but its usually
-the fastest backend for a low number of fds.
+using this backend. It doesn't scale too well (O(highest_fd)), but its
+usually the fastest backend for a low number of (low\-numbered :) fds.
+.Sp
+To get good performance out of this backend you need a high amount of
+parallelity (most of the file descriptors should be busy). If you are
+writing a server, you should \f(CW\*(C`accept ()\*(C'\fR in a loop to accept as many
+connections as possible during one iteration. You might also want to have
+a look at \f(CW\*(C`ev_set_io_collect_interval ()\*(C'\fR to increase the amount of
+readyness notifications you get per iteration.
.ie n .IP """EVBACKEND_POLL"" (value 2, poll backend, available everywhere except on windows)" 4
.el .IP "\f(CWEVBACKEND_POLL\fR (value 2, poll backend, available everywhere except on windows)" 4
.IX Item "EVBACKEND_POLL (value 2, poll backend, available everywhere except on windows)"
-And this is your standard \fIpoll\fR\|(2) backend. It's more complicated than
-select, but handles sparse fds better and has no artificial limit on the
-number of fds you can use (except it will slow down considerably with a
-lot of inactive fds). It scales similarly to select, i.e. O(total_fds).
+And this is your standard \fIpoll\fR\|(2) backend. It's more complicated
+than select, but handles sparse fds better and has no artificial
+limit on the number of fds you can use (except it will slow down
+considerably with a lot of inactive fds). It scales similarly to select,
+i.e. O(total_fds). See the entry for \f(CW\*(C`EVBACKEND_SELECT\*(C'\fR, above, for
+performance tips.
.ie n .IP """EVBACKEND_EPOLL"" (value 4, Linux)" 4
.el .IP "\f(CWEVBACKEND_EPOLL\fR (value 4, Linux)" 4
.IX Item "EVBACKEND_EPOLL (value 4, Linux)"
like O(total_fds) where n is the total number of fds (or the highest fd),
epoll scales either O(1) or O(active_fds). The epoll design has a number
of shortcomings, such as silently dropping events in some hard-to-detect
-cases and rewuiring a syscall per fd change, no fork support and bad
-support for dup:
+cases and rewiring a syscall per fd change, no fork support and bad
+support for dup.
.Sp
While stopping, setting and starting an I/O watcher in the same iteration
will result in some caching, there is still a syscall per such incident
Please note that epoll sometimes generates spurious notifications, so you
need to use non-blocking I/O or other means to avoid blocking when no data
(or space) is available.
+.Sp
+Best performance from this backend is achieved by not unregistering all
+watchers for a file descriptor until it has been closed, if possible, i.e.
+keep at least one watcher active per fd at all times.
+.Sp
+While nominally embeddeble in other event loops, this feature is broken in
+all kernel versions tested so far.
.ie n .IP """EVBACKEND_KQUEUE"" (value 8, most \s-1BSD\s0 clones)" 4
.el .IP "\f(CWEVBACKEND_KQUEUE\fR (value 8, most \s-1BSD\s0 clones)" 4
.IX Item "EVBACKEND_KQUEUE (value 8, most BSD clones)"
Kqueue deserves special mention, as at the time of this writing, it
-was broken on \fIall\fR BSDs (usually it doesn't work with anything but
-sockets and pipes, except on Darwin, where of course it's completely
-useless. On NetBSD, it seems to work for all the \s-1FD\s0 types I tested, so it
-is used by default there). For this reason it's not being \*(L"autodetected\*(R"
+was broken on all BSDs except NetBSD (usually it doesn't work reliably
+with anything but sockets and pipes, except on Darwin, where of course
+it's completely useless). For this reason it's not being \*(L"autodetected\*(R"
unless you explicitly specify it explicitly in the flags (i.e. using
\&\f(CW\*(C`EVBACKEND_KQUEUE\*(C'\fR) or libev was compiled on a known-to-be-good (\-enough)
system like NetBSD.
.Sp
+You still can embed kqueue into a normal poll or select backend and use it
+only for sockets (after having made sure that sockets work with kqueue on
+the target platform). See \f(CW\*(C`ev_embed\*(C'\fR watchers for more info.
+.Sp
It scales in the same way as the epoll backend, but the interface to the
-kernel is more efficient (which says nothing about its actual speed,
-of course). While stopping, setting and starting an I/O watcher does
-never cause an extra syscall as with epoll, it still adds up to two event
-changes per incident, support for \f(CW\*(C`fork ()\*(C'\fR is very bad and it drops fds
-silently in similarly hard-to-detetc cases.
+kernel is more efficient (which says nothing about its actual speed, of
+course). While stopping, setting and starting an I/O watcher does never
+cause an extra syscall as with \f(CW\*(C`EVBACKEND_EPOLL\*(C'\fR, it still adds up to
+two event changes per incident, support for \f(CW\*(C`fork ()\*(C'\fR is very bad and it
+drops fds silently in similarly hard-to-detect cases.
+.Sp
+This backend usually performs well under most conditions.
+.Sp
+While nominally embeddable in other event loops, this doesn't work
+everywhere, so you might need to test for this. And since it is broken
+almost everywhere, you should only use it when you have a lot of sockets
+(for which it usually works), by embedding it into another event loop
+(e.g. \f(CW\*(C`EVBACKEND_SELECT\*(C'\fR or \f(CW\*(C`EVBACKEND_POLL\*(C'\fR) and using it only for
+sockets.
.ie n .IP """EVBACKEND_DEVPOLL"" (value 16, Solaris 8)" 4
.el .IP "\f(CWEVBACKEND_DEVPOLL\fR (value 16, Solaris 8)" 4
.IX Item "EVBACKEND_DEVPOLL (value 16, Solaris 8)"
-This is not implemented yet (and might never be).
+This is not implemented yet (and might never be, unless you send me an
+implementation). According to reports, \f(CW\*(C`/dev/poll\*(C'\fR only supports sockets
+and is not embeddable, which would limit the usefulness of this backend
+immensely.
.ie n .IP """EVBACKEND_PORT"" (value 32, Solaris 10)" 4
.el .IP "\f(CWEVBACKEND_PORT\fR (value 32, Solaris 10)" 4
.IX Item "EVBACKEND_PORT (value 32, Solaris 10)"
Please note that solaris event ports can deliver a lot of spurious
notifications, so you need to use non-blocking I/O or other means to avoid
blocking when no data (or space) is available.
+.Sp
+While this backend scales well, it requires one system call per active
+file descriptor per loop iteration. For small and medium numbers of file
+descriptors a \*(L"slow\*(R" \f(CW\*(C`EVBACKEND_SELECT\*(C'\fR or \f(CW\*(C`EVBACKEND_POLL\*(C'\fR backend
+might perform better.
.ie n .IP """EVBACKEND_ALL""" 4
.el .IP "\f(CWEVBACKEND_ALL\fR" 4
.IX Item "EVBACKEND_ALL"
Try all backends (even potentially broken ones that wouldn't be tried
with \f(CW\*(C`EVFLAG_AUTO\*(C'\fR). Since this is a mask, you can do stuff such as
\&\f(CW\*(C`EVBACKEND_ALL & ~EVBACKEND_KQUEUE\*(C'\fR.
+.Sp
+It is definitely not recommended to use this flag.
.RE
.RS 4
.Sp
\& ev_ref (loop);
\& ev_signal_stop (loop, &exitsig);
.Ve
+.IP "ev_set_io_collect_interval (loop, ev_tstamp interval)" 4
+.IX Item "ev_set_io_collect_interval (loop, ev_tstamp interval)"
+.PD 0
+.IP "ev_set_timeout_collect_interval (loop, ev_tstamp interval)" 4
+.IX Item "ev_set_timeout_collect_interval (loop, ev_tstamp interval)"
+.PD
+These advanced functions influence the time that libev will spend waiting
+for events. Both are by default \f(CW0\fR, meaning that libev will try to
+invoke timer/periodic callbacks and I/O callbacks with minimum latency.
+.Sp
+Setting these to a higher value (the \f(CW\*(C`interval\*(C'\fR \fImust\fR be >= \f(CW0\fR)
+allows libev to delay invocation of I/O and timer/periodic callbacks to
+increase efficiency of loop iterations.
+.Sp
+The background is that sometimes your program runs just fast enough to
+handle one (or very few) event(s) per loop iteration. While this makes
+the program responsive, it also wastes a lot of \s-1CPU\s0 time to poll for new
+events, especially with backends like \f(CW\*(C`select ()\*(C'\fR which have a high
+overhead for the actual polling but can deliver many events at once.
+.Sp
+By setting a higher \fIio collect interval\fR you allow libev to spend more
+time collecting I/O events, so you can handle more events per iteration,
+at the cost of increasing latency. Timeouts (both \f(CW\*(C`ev_periodic\*(C'\fR and
+\&\f(CW\*(C`ev_timer\*(C'\fR) will be not affected. Setting this to a non-null value will
+introduce an additional \f(CW\*(C`ev_sleep ()\*(C'\fR call into most loop iterations.
+.Sp
+Likewise, by setting a higher \fItimeout collect interval\fR you allow libev
+to spend more time collecting timeouts, at the expense of increased
+latency (the watcher callback will be called later). \f(CW\*(C`ev_io\*(C'\fR watchers
+will not be affected. Setting this to a non-null value will not introduce
+any overhead in libev.
+.Sp
+Many (busy) programs can usually benefit by setting the io collect
+interval to a value near \f(CW0.1\fR or so, which is often enough for
+interactive servers (of course not for games), likewise for timeouts. It
+usually doesn't make much sense to set it to a lower value than \f(CW0.01\fR,
+as this approsaches the timing granularity of most systems.
.SH "ANATOMY OF A WATCHER"
.IX Header "ANATOMY OF A WATCHER"
A watcher is a structure that you create and register to record your
the libev application should not optimise around libev but should leave
optimisations to libev.
.PP
-\fIThs special problem of dup'ed file descriptors\fR
-.IX Subsection "Ths special problem of dup'ed file descriptors"
+\fIThe special problem of dup'ed file descriptors\fR
+.IX Subsection "The special problem of dup'ed file descriptors"
.PP
Some backends (e.g. epoll), cannot register events for file descriptors,
but only events for the underlying file descriptions. That menas when you
priority, to ensure that they are being run before any other watchers
after the poll. Also, \f(CW\*(C`ev_check\*(C'\fR watchers (and \f(CW\*(C`ev_prepare\*(C'\fR watchers,
too) should not activate (\*(L"feed\*(R") events into libev. While libev fully
-supports this, they will be called before other \f(CW\*(C`ev_check\*(C'\fR watchers did
-their job. As \f(CW\*(C`ev_check\*(C'\fR watchers are often used to embed other event
-loops those other event loops might be in an unusable state until their
-\&\f(CW\*(C`ev_check\*(C'\fR watcher ran (always remind yourself to coexist peacefully with
-others).
+supports this, they will be called before other \f(CW\*(C`ev_check\*(C'\fR watchers
+did their job. As \f(CW\*(C`ev_check\*(C'\fR watchers are often used to embed other
+(non\-libev) event loops those other event loops might be in an unusable
+state until their \f(CW\*(C`ev_check\*(C'\fR watcher ran (always remind yourself to
+coexist peacefully with others).
.PP
\fIWatcher-Specific Functions and Data Members\fR
.IX Subsection "Watcher-Specific Functions and Data Members"
This is a rather advanced watcher type that lets you embed one event loop
into another (currently only \f(CW\*(C`ev_io\*(C'\fR events are supported in the embedded
loop, other types of watchers might be handled in a delayed or incorrect
-fashion and must not be used). (See portability notes, below).
+fashion and must not be used).
.PP
There are primarily two reasons you would want that: work around bugs and
prioritise I/O.
\& else
\& loop_lo = loop_hi;
.Ve
-.Sh "Portability notes"
-.IX Subsection "Portability notes"
-Kqueue is nominally embeddable, but this is broken on all BSDs that I
-tried, in various ways. Usually the embedded event loop will simply never
-receive events, sometimes it will only trigger a few times, sometimes in a
-loop. Epoll is also nominally embeddable, but many Linux kernel versions
-will always eport the epoll fd as ready, even when no events are pending.
-.PP
-While libev allows embedding these backends (they are contained in
-\&\f(CW\*(C`ev_embeddable_backends ()\*(C'\fR), take extreme care that it will actually
-work.
-.PP
-When in doubt, create a dynamic event loop forced to use sockets (this
-usually works) and possibly another thread and a pipe or so to report to
-your main event loop.
.PP
\fIWatcher-Specific Functions and Data Members\fR
.IX Subsection "Watcher-Specific Functions and Data Members"
be attempted. This effectively replaces \f(CW\*(C`gettimeofday\*(C'\fR by \f(CW\*(C`clock_get
(CLOCK_REALTIME, ...)\*(C'\fR and will not normally affect correctness. See the
note about libraries in the description of \f(CW\*(C`EV_USE_MONOTONIC\*(C'\fR, though.
+.IP "\s-1EV_USE_NANOSLEEP\s0" 4
+.IX Item "EV_USE_NANOSLEEP"
+If defined to be \f(CW1\fR, libev will assume that \f(CW\*(C`nanosleep ()\*(C'\fR is available
+and will use it for delays. Otherwise it will use \f(CW\*(C`select ()\*(C'\fR.
.IP "\s-1EV_USE_SELECT\s0" 4
.IX Item "EV_USE_SELECT"
If undefined or defined to be \f(CW1\fR, libev will compile in support for the
projects / software / libev.git / blobdiff