Re: Is there something about VB6 that makes it a bad choice for NNTP?

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

I have code for both SMTP and HTTP that uses
Windows sockets with no intermediary. I don't
know whether that helps. You'd have to write the
version to talk to an NNTP server. I think it would
be basically the same thing, but the actual conversation
with the server would, of course, have a different
format, and I don't know what that is. In any case,
you're using 3rd-party controls now. If they're slow,
as Kevin implied, that's no reason to assume VB
is slow. If you use the sockets APIs then there's no
reason you should be limited by anything other than
the server response time.

Some more thoughts on this: Is VB in some way throttled internally
where any form of COMMS are involved? I suddenly remembered PDQCom,
which must have been written for a reason. Okay, that was serial
comms, but could it be that VB has only 16-bit buffers in the COMMS
layer? Was it not the case that VB could never achieve speeds greater
than dial-up? After all, VB6 was already old before high-speed
broadband really took off.

I don't do that sort of work, but my impression was that you are seeing
slow response for one main reason, VB apps are single threaded. I didn't
like seeing all those DoEvents loops you had, but it seems to me, if you
could somehow mangage to do that work in parallel, it may go a bit
quicker.

Don't ask me how, as I said, I don't do that sort of work, but that was
my first impression of why you might be seeing slow response times....

LFS


Fair enough, but the time spent inside the WaitFor... loops is minimal
since the trigger responses (211, 221... etc) from the server are
immediate.

However, I am now trying with Dolphin's DsSocket OCX and that looks
more promising. I did try with Catalyst's SocketWrench, but that is SO
complex, I gave up!

I also looked at Dart's NNTP control (documentation), but didn't try
it, since you have to purchase an entire suite of controls just to get
the NNTP control! Seems a daft way to market something, but there ya
go!

MM


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: aio_read/write versus O_NONBLOCK
    ... impose an implementation (eg one with a per-file write buffer) that is, ... there's generally no reason to wait to start to the ... For sockets, there's no logical reason you might want to wait to be ... So an AIO mechanism basically *is* the equivalent of the socket non- ...
    (comp.unix.programmer)
  • Re: STILL NEED MY 1200 XL COMPUTER!!!!
    ... > an 800XL where one of the 40 pin chips went out, ... any desire to mod my 130XE after I opened it up and found 0 sockets. ... > chip or two more then an 800XL but has a huge footprint. ... > Bob's mods are a major reason to use a 1200XL. ...
    (comp.sys.atari.8bit)
  • Re: How Do I Use An SSLServerSocket With ServerSocketChannel?
    ... The reason is that it's not nearly as simple to do as you might ... so I loop and keep reading one inputstream and writing it to the ... isn't that going to steal a lot of CPU time ...
    (comp.lang.java.help)
  • Re: 12 point vs. 6 pt. sockets / box wrenches
    ... you want the 6pt with the stronger ... There's no reason for 12pt sockets to exist. ... Ratchet heads sometimes will not fit. ...
    (rec.bicycles.tech)