in reply to Re: Optimized remote ping
in thread Optimized remote ping
Now, BrowserUK, since there isn’t any sort of “connection” being established here,
is it ever possible for the returning ping-packets to be dropped as they pile-up waiting to be received?
I have noticed that you often single out
BrowserUk in your posts, for example:
- Re^2: Annoying 'Use of uninitialized value in concatenation' warning: "as BrowserUK wisely suggests"
- Re: Perl/Tk code structure: "Agreeing fully with BrowserUK's previous comments on this (I think...)"
- Re: What's Wrong with program: "such ideas having already been given to you, and in great detail by experts such as BrowserUK"
- Re^4: Faster push and shift: "Quite obviously, BrowserUK very routinely processes gigantic datasets during the course of his work day. He is quite the expert on those (what are to many of us...) edge cases. Upvoted."
- Re: Temp variable performace vs Inline behavior: "Apart from the performance/capacity "edge cases" that I openly acknowledge BrowserUK (in particular) deals with every day"
- Re: Concurrent Cache Pattern: "I say this in all seriousness, BrowserUK could whip one up in about three minutes"
- Re: how apply large memory with perl?: "BrowserUK's algorithm is of course more efficient, and he has the RAM."
- Re^3: Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler: "BrowserUK, I specifically acknowledge that your work is an exception to that statement, and very impressive work it certainly is."
- Re^3: var comparison: "with the notable exception of the very valid edge-cases that my esteemed colleague, BrowserUK, routinely and legitimately encounters in his daily work"
- Re: module w/ object-oriented and functional interfaces: best practices?: "Echoing BrowserUK’s comments, and after up-voting his post, ..."
- Re: Comparing sets of phrases stored in a database?: "As a slight parenthetical comment to BrowserUK’s excellent (and heavily up-voted) advice..."
- Re^3: Does IO::Select work? (Problem partially resolved): "If BrowserUK said it, yes, he is sure. And sure to be right. Seriously."
- Re: Evolving a faster filter?: "I am certain that this thread will attract the attention of BrowserUK, who is well-known about these parts to be especially expert in high-performance algorithms in high-volume situations. I especially look forward to his insights on this subject."
- Re: Does the main thread yield?: "as BrowserUK's elegant code example does by blocking the sender while the queue is too-large. (I really do think that you should put this little jewel into CPAN anyway, even if it uses an undocumented feature.)"
- Re^5: Optimization Help: "BrowserUK has a well-earned reputation for doing things like that"
- Re: Problem with Threaded Socket Server: "Adding one more thought (in case I missed it) to BrowserUK’s excellent recommendations here ... (++)x2"
- Re^3: How to optimize CPU and Memory usage?: "You, BrowserUK, are constantly squeezing every ounce of capacity and performance out of a program ... because you quite legitimately need to, and you are obviously quite good at it."
- Re^3: Proper undefine queue with multithreads: "I simply suggest that you should follow BrowserUK’s sage advice exactly as given ... take BrowserUK’s excellent recommendations, and go"
- Re: Multithreading How do I share hash of hash of arrays: "...as BrowserUK correctly insisted"
- Re: Using threads to process multiple files: "Upvotes all around, sirs ... as BrowserUK excellently describes"
- Re^3: Process large text data in array: "We know that BrowserUK, in his daily $work, deals with enormous datasets in very high-performance situations. If he says what he just did about your situation, then, frankly, I would take it as a very well-informed directive to “do it that way.”"
- Re^5: write hash to disk after memory limit: "I definitely want to suffix this post with all of the extremely-valid points that BrowserUK made ... As his Voice Of Experience™ says"
- Re: ithreads memory leak: "Truer words have never been spoken than what BrowserUK just so-well said"
- Re^3: Can I/O operations on the same IO::Socket be executed in different threads?: "Yes, I did up-vote (yes, I said up...) BrowserUK’s comments to this thread and to the other thread that he referred-to ... while also (intending to be) speaking very favorably of it."
- Re: How smart is 'seek $fh, $pos, 0'?: "Very interesting results, BrowserUK ... As I well know that, in your line of work, BrowserUK, they often do ... very much so"
- Re^5: Nobody Expects the Agile Imposition (Part VIII): Software Craftsmanship: "Chuckle ... you ... actually ... said that ... to BrowserUK?! Quite obviously you have no idea that he is one of the most highly-respected Monks here ... and quite-deservedly so."
- Re^3: The problem of documenting complex modules.: "Excellent thread, BrowserUK ... very thought-provoking throughout, and showered with up-votes."
- Re^3: validate variable-length lines in one regex?: "as BrowserUK originally suggests below ... (All now liberally sprinkled with up-vote pixie-dust...)"
- Re: Perl seg fault while joining threads: "BrowserUK, you’ve had plenty of experience with both Perl threads and libraries. In your experience, does this Perl-specific COW behavior typically cause grief in cases like this one? (And, BTW, I mean that as a serious, face-value question, addressed to an expert in such things.)"
- Re: Experimental features: autoderef vs postfix deref: "I will frankly agree with you, BrowserUK. (Upvoted.)"
This is one aspect of your posting style that I
find amusing, not annoying.
However, given the harsh and unrelenting
criticism you have endured from BrowserUk,
I am puzzled as to why you persist in
showering him with such lavish praise.