From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lj1-f193.google.com (mail-lj1-f193.google.com [209.85.208.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A6DA46970F for ; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 17:50:31 +0300 (MSK) Received: by mail-lj1-f193.google.com with SMTP id m6so24909878ljc.1 for ; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 06:50:31 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2019 17:50:28 +0300 From: Konstantin Osipov Message-ID: <20191129145028.GA18043@atlas> References: <20191128204512.19732-1-gorcunov@gmail.com> <20191128204512.19732-2-gorcunov@gmail.com> <20191129055939.GH15149@atlas> <20191129094059.GA19879@uranus> <20191129111903.GA7760@atlas> <20191129113659.GE19879@uranus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191129113659.GE19879@uranus> Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 1/5] popen: Introduce a backend engine List-Id: Tarantool development patches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Cyrill Gorcunov Cc: tml * Cyrill Gorcunov [19/11/29 16:31]: > And how it is different from fio.write()? I mean I don't understand > why for regular writes in fio.write() we call for coio and for > popen we should not do the same. Cyrill, the difference is popen works with a pipe, not a file. Unix supports non-blocking IO for pipes, and usually it doesn't support it for files. -- Konstantin Osipov, Moscow, Russia