We have a server that needs 1 UDP connection for each gameplay area, and these each run on their own thread. We are using C++. We are non-blocking sockets with recvfrom. The first thing checked in the "read" function is if the recvfrom "in" buffer contains NULL after calling, and then if the error is WSAEWOULDBLOCK.
If the error is found, the function returns and the thread is put to sleep for 1ms (but really, it's longer).
If there is data, it is processed. Some paths lead to immediate processing but most cases the data is put into a queue for the game area's main thread to handle.
My question: Is there a more efficient and performing method than using thread.sleep(1) to ensure each gameplay area's UDP Server instance does not spin while there is nothing to receive, and yet be able to respond to packets faster than the inherent and random thread wake-up of the Scheduler?
In this last part of the requirement, I'm referring to the fact that a thread will usually never sleep only 1ms, rather, on average more like 50ms.
The case may arise, later when the server is being sent requests at a constant rate, that the loop to check and respond to packets is never empty, and so the thread.sleep(1) will never be reached, so I suppose this is more a Best Practice type of question, but I would implement a better solution if one is available.
Thank you
Edit- added info. After adding this, perhaps this implementation isn't anything to worry about. I think worst case scenario is a set of packets would have to wait the 45-55ms for the thread to be scheduled should they miss the opportunity to be read by the socket. I suppose to improve, I could make the recvfrom call it's own thread, make the socket block, and use a conditional variable to awaken the thread responsible for processing the packets. What do you think about this idea? Too much overhead?
