On 30 Aug 2015 at 19:46, Glen Fernandes wrote:
On Sun, Aug 30, 2015, Gruenke,Matt wrote:
This obviously isn't a proper review, and shouldn't be counted as such. Rather, I pose a question to other reviewers: for how many of you does this actually solve a problem you've faced or anticipate? For me, the answer is "no". Otherwise, I'd invest further time in a proper review.
This is exactly what I feel. The answer is "no" for me too. This is also the reason why I haven't submitted a formal review.
I was interested in Boost having an asynchronous file I/O library and was looking forward to reviewing AFIO because of all the discussion on the list previously about performance. What I was expecting was also a portable abstraction over platform specific APIs like KAIO or overlapped I/O.
Linux KAIO is a remarkably useless async i/o API, at least to Linux kernel 3.2 on ext4 which was the last I tested. It was no better than a thread pool. This is why I have been in no rush to add support. The Windows IOCP backend does deliver significant benefits, IF you restructure your algorithms to fit. Niall -- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/