3 ms·

> Network IO discussion: https://github.com/axboe/liburing/issues/536 https://github.com/axboe/liburing/issues/536 I see an issue with a narrative but zero dis

> Network IO discussion: https://github.com/axboe/liburing/issues/536 https://github.com/axboe/liburing/issues/536 I see an issue with a narrative but zero discussion at that link. Furthermore, your io_uring benchmark being utilized in that issue isn't even batching CQE consumption. I've submitted a quick and dirty untested PR adding rudimentary batching at [0]. Frankly, what seems to be a constant din of poorly-written low-effort benchmarks portraying io_uring in a negative light vs. epoll is getting rather old. [0] https://github.com/frevib/io_uring-echo-server/pull/16 https://github.com/frevib/io_uring-echo-server/pull/16

tveita 5y ago
That seems uncharitable. The linked issue barely mentions frevib's echo server, and in the one place it does it's the fastest! Further they show that performance improves when using io_uring for readiness polling but standard read/write calls to actually write - that suggests io_uring_for_each_cqe does not explain the cases where epoll is faster. > I've submitted a quick and dirty untested PR That's not improving the situation much then - surely any performance fix should come with at least a rudimentary benchmark?