Re: Asynchronous socket programming vs. remoting

Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance

From: Frank Hileman (frankhil_at_no.spamming.prodigesoftware.com)
Date: 11/16/04 

Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 13:54:40 -0800

That's great! Yes, .NET makes basic scalable tcp/ip easy. You don't need a
lot of code. We just have one small file each for the client and server --
about 2 pages of code, I would say.
- Frank
"Michael Lindsey" <mike_lindsey@alltel.net> wrote in message
news:ONtmd.3$KI4.1@fe39.usenetserver.com...
> Thanks Frank.
> You are the first person that said I should use sockets.
> The argument against sockets is usually "all the coding and maintenance"
> that it takes to get it working well.
> I decided to give it a try and got a real nice solution up and running
> quickly, with surprisingly little code, using asynchronous network
> streams.
> The performance is awesome! I am pulling images from FL to GA and loading
> them quicker than I can load them from my harddrive using the file system.
>
> It scales nice too - I tried throwing 400 requests at the server in a span
> of 30 secs and it returned all images without a hitch.
> I was pulling them at 129kb/s and that limitation is likely due to using
> DSL
> over a VPN.
> The processor usage during my test never went above 8% on a Pentium II 500
> with 1 gig of ram.
> The ram usage was at 10 mb but dropped back down to 2-3 mb after each
> test.
> The threads got up around 100 during the test and dropped back down to 6
> after the test. The extra threads were due to the asynchronous processing
> and it was all handled by the system. I didn't have to create a single
> extra
> thread manually.
>
> Thanks for the advice.
>
> Michael Lindsey