monoio VS delimited

There is also another thread-per-core implementation by ByteDance (TikTok) for Rust called Monoio with benchmarks[0] comparing it to Tokio and Glommio.

[0] https://github.com/bytedance/monoio/blob/master/docs/en/benc...

My understanding is you always need a runtime, somethings needs to drive the async flow. But there are others on the market, just not without the.. market domination... of tokio.

https://github.com/smol-rs/smol looks promising simply for being minimal

https://github.com/bytedance/monoio looks potentially easier to work with than tokio

https://github.com/DataDog/glommio is built around linux io_uring and seems somewhat promising for performance reasons.

I haven't played with any of these yet, because Tokio is unfortunately the path of least resistance. And a bit viral in how it's infected tings.

I assume Tokio itself, see e.g monoio or glommio, but also Seastar for C++.

I think monoio is also thread-per-core but also iouring https://github.com/bytedance/monoio. I don't know how you would shard certain keys into different threads, but if you can do that deterministically then there could be a significant speed up.

I believe this is also "thread-per-core".

Bytedance has their in-house monoio <https://github.com/bytedance/monoio> (supports io-uring) but it requires rust nightly.

There's another thread-per-core runtime called https://github.com/bytedance/monoio

It's worth mentioning: Under "Async Executors", for "io_uring" there is only "Glommio"

I recently found out that ByteDance has a competitor library which supposedly has better performance:

https://github.com/bytedance/monoio

https://github.com/DataDog/glommio/issues/554

I see that, I also tried with monoio, but the developer of that runtime mentioned that https://github.com/bytedance/monoio/blob/master/examples/hyper_server.rs might have soundness issues

Oh, I have written my own share of userspace C context switching libraries, I know all the gory the details :). For example see my minimalist [1] stackful coroutine library: the full context switching logic is three inline asm instructions (99% of the complexity in that code is to transparently support throwing exceptions across coroutine boundaries with no overhead in the happy path).

You need compiler help for the custom calling convention support and possibly to optimize away the context switching overhead for stackful coroutines, which is something that compilers can already do for stackless coroutines.

The duff device is just a way to simulate stackless coroutines (i.e. async/await or whateverer) in plain C, in a way that the compiler can still optimize quite well.

[1] https://github.com/gpderetta/delimited/blob/master/delimited...

Using gcc extended asm you can pass literal constants to the asm and they will be expanded textually (or at least their address will). I don't think the details are fully documented anywhere and I had to use intel syntax to make it work, but it might be possible even wit AT&T syntax.

Take a look a this[1] for example. See how trampoline, the destructor and the size are passed in with the 'i' constraint and are referred to their value with the %cX constraint (yes, the code is write only and even with a lot of comments I have only the most vague idea of what I was trying to do here).

Probably more work is require for PIC though.

[1] https://github.com/gpderetta/delimited/blob/7e755d643ee45897...