Kas Ob.

It was a joke of cutting text out of context, and how this anything other than joke, (may be not funny though).

I don't know, but this sound like human trafficking.

I highly recommend using OID instead of NID, they are documented, there is so many internet resources and DB populate them, and most important you can find the needed entry by its OID from any certificate or CSR. In this page there is few lines on how to convert OID in its text formatted syntax into OBJ https://docs.openssl.org/1.0.2/man3/OBJ_nid2obj/#examples then use OBJ instead of NID, as there is the same equivalent APIs for each of them Also important note here, "Set" might not be acting as "Add" and i can't find details about this, but if there is Add then it should be used, and not depending on Set From translated code from C++, this code might work, i say might as i didn't test it, just translated it // Create ASN1_OBJECT for givenName OID 2.5.4.42 objGivenName := OBJ_txt2obj(PAnsiChar(AnsiString('2.5.4.42')), 1); if objGivenName = nil then raise Exception.Create('Failed to create ASN1_OBJECT for givenName(2.5.4.42)'); X509_NAME_add_entry_by_OBJ(name, objGivenName, MBSTRING_ASC, PBYTE(AnsiString('John')), -1, -1, 0); ASN1_OBJECT_free(objGivenName); Now as suggestions for Angus, it might be useful to add generic functions to this, this will be future proof, allowing any non essential entries or exotic objects to be added or enumerated, in other words allow customization in its purest way. It could use NID, Text and OID, implement once and can be used whenever request like this pop then the solution is easy, find the OID (or text) for the entry then add it or read it using the custom entry access givenName = 2.5.4.42 surname = 2.5.4.4 https://oid-base.com/cgi-bin/display?oid=2.5.4.4&submit=Display&action=display https://oid-base.com/cgi-bin/display?oid=2.5.4.42&submit=Display&action=display Using NID is also nice but only if it is already Known and declared in OpenSSL Pascal headers, so it will be limited.

I remember i already shared here in the forum a way to hook compiler messages, not OTA nor NTA, but good old fashion hooking. interacting might be hard to very hard to pin, but getting compiler message(s) is doable, well, tested on few old IDEs, up to XE8, if that will help then i can search for that fun project and try to adjust it for you.

Here another and simpler example, try this interface with the above function TInterfacedObjectFooBar = class(TInterfacedObject, IBar, IFoo) procedure DoSomething; end; TInterfacedObjectFooBarEx = class(TInterfacedObjectFooBar, IBar, IFoo) procedure DoSomething; end; And its result Implemented interfaces in TInterfacedObjectFooBar 0. GUID = {11111111-0000-0000-0000-000000000001} VMT addr: 004D3160 offest: 12 1. GUID = {22222222-0000-0000-0000-000000000002} VMT addr: 004D3170 offest: 16 Implemented interfaces in TInterfacedObject 0. GUID = {00000000-0000-0000-C000-000000000046} VMT addr: 00402358 offest: 8 Implemented interfaces in TInterfacedObjectFooBarEx 0. GUID = {11111111-0000-0000-0000-000000000001} VMT addr: 004D32F8 offest: 20 1. GUID = {22222222-0000-0000-0000-000000000002} VMT addr: 004D3308 offest: 24 Implemented interfaces in TInterfacedObjectFooBar 0. GUID = {11111111-0000-0000-0000-000000000001} VMT addr: 004D3160 offest: 12 1. GUID = {22222222-0000-0000-0000-000000000002} VMT addr: 004D3170 offest: 16 Implemented interfaces in TInterfacedObject 0. GUID = {00000000-0000-0000-C000-000000000046} VMT addr: 00402358 offest: 8 So make sure you are looking at the right VMT, remember that TObject VMT order is irrelevant with its interfaces VMTs structure and order.

It is right. OK, hold your horses here for second, and i want you to check if you are checking the VMT for the interfaces or something else like TObject, also are they named (with TGUID attached) ? I recommend that you go to this blog post and and read this very article and study the output carefully, try to get how interface inheritance and their VMT works. Here a modified example from the blog program Project6; {$APPTYPE CONSOLE} uses Classes, SysUtils, TypInfo, ComObj; type IFoo = interface ['{11111111-0000-0000-0000-000000000001}'] procedure DoSomething; end; IBar = interface ['{22222222-0000-0000-0000-000000000002}'] procedure DoSomething; end; TFooBar = class(TObject, IUnknown, IFoo, IBar) function QueryInterface(const IID: TGUID; out Obj): HResult; stdcall; function _AddRef: Integer; stdcall; function _Release: Integer; stdcall; procedure DoSomething; end; TBarFoo = class(TObject, IBar, IFoo, IUnknown) function QueryInterface(const IID: TGUID; out Obj): HResult; stdcall; function _AddRef: Integer; stdcall; function _Release: Integer; stdcall; procedure DoSomething; end; TFooBarOnly = class(TObject, IFoo, IBar) function QueryInterface(const IID: TGUID; out Obj): HResult; stdcall; function _AddRef: Integer; stdcall; function _Release: Integer; stdcall; procedure DoSomething; end; TBarFooOnly = class(TObject, IBar, IFoo) function QueryInterface(const IID: TGUID; out Obj): HResult; stdcall; function _AddRef: Integer; stdcall; function _Release: Integer; stdcall; procedure DoSomething; end; procedure DumpInterfaces(AClass: TClass); var i: integer; InterfaceTable: PInterfaceTable; InterfaceEntry: PInterfaceEntry; begin while Assigned(AClass) do begin InterfaceTable := AClass.GetInterfaceTable; if Assigned(InterfaceTable) then begin writeln('Implemented interfaces in ', AClass.ClassName); for i := 0 to InterfaceTable.EntryCount - 1 do begin InterfaceEntry := @InterfaceTable.Entries[i]; Write(Format('%d. GUID = %s', [i, GUIDToString(InterfaceEntry.IID)])); Writeln(' VMT addr: ', IntToHex(Cardinal(InterfaceEntry.VTable), SizeOf(Pointer) * 2), ' offest: ', InterfaceEntry.IOffset); end; end; AClass := AClass.ClassParent; end; writeln; end; { TFooBar } procedure TFooBar.DoSomething; begin end; function TFooBar.QueryInterface(const IID: TGUID; out Obj): HResult; begin end; function TFooBar._AddRef: Integer; begin end; function TFooBar._Release: Integer; begin end; { TBarFoo } procedure TBarFoo.DoSomething; begin end; function TBarFoo.QueryInterface(const IID: TGUID; out Obj): HResult; begin end; function TBarFoo._AddRef: Integer; begin end; function TBarFoo._Release: Integer; begin end; { TBarFooOnly } procedure TBarFooOnly.DoSomething; begin end; function TBarFooOnly.QueryInterface(const IID: TGUID; out Obj): HResult; begin end; function TBarFooOnly._AddRef: Integer; begin end; function TBarFooOnly._Release: Integer; begin end; { TFooBarOnly } procedure TFooBarOnly.DoSomething; begin end; function TFooBarOnly.QueryInterface(const IID: TGUID; out Obj): HResult; begin end; function TFooBarOnly._AddRef: Integer; begin end; function TFooBarOnly._Release: Integer; begin end; begin DumpInterfaces(TComponent); DumpInterfaces(TComObject); DumpInterfaces(TComObjectFactory); DumpInterfaces(TFooBar); DumpInterfaces(TBarFoo); DumpInterfaces(TFooBarOnly); DumpInterfaces(TBarFooOnly); readln; end. The output from my XE8 Implemented interfaces in TComponent 0. GUID = {E28B1858-EC86-4559-8FCD-6B4F824151ED} VMT addr: 0048C71C offest: 56 1. GUID = {00000000-0000-0000-C000-000000000046} VMT addr: 0048C72C offest: 60 Implemented interfaces in TComObject 0. GUID = {DF0B3D60-548F-101B-8E65-08002B2BD119} VMT addr: 004CF25C offest: 24 1. GUID = {00000000-0000-0000-C000-000000000046} VMT addr: 004CF26C offest: 28 Implemented interfaces in TComObjectFactory 0. GUID = {B196B28F-BAB4-101A-B69C-00AA00341D07} VMT addr: 004CF93C offest: 72 1. GUID = {00000001-0000-0000-C000-000000000046} VMT addr: 004CF93C offest: 72 2. GUID = {00000000-0000-0000-C000-000000000046} VMT addr: 004CF93C offest: 72 Implemented interfaces in TFooBar 0. GUID = {22222222-0000-0000-0000-000000000002} VMT addr: 004D2880 offest: 4 1. GUID = {11111111-0000-0000-0000-000000000001} VMT addr: 004D2890 offest: 8 2. GUID = {00000000-0000-0000-C000-000000000046} VMT addr: 004D2880 offest: 4 Implemented interfaces in TBarFoo 0. GUID = {00000000-0000-0000-C000-000000000046} VMT addr: 004D2AC4 offest: 4 1. GUID = {11111111-0000-0000-0000-000000000001} VMT addr: 004D2AC4 offest: 4 2. GUID = {22222222-0000-0000-0000-000000000002} VMT addr: 004D2AD4 offest: 8 Implemented interfaces in TFooBarOnly 0. GUID = {22222222-0000-0000-0000-000000000002} VMT addr: 004D2D08 offest: 4 1. GUID = {11111111-0000-0000-0000-000000000001} VMT addr: 004D2D18 offest: 8 Implemented interfaces in TBarFooOnly 0. GUID = {11111111-0000-0000-0000-000000000001} VMT addr: 004D2F34 offest: 4 1. GUID = {22222222-0000-0000-0000-000000000002} VMT addr: 004D2F44 offest: 8 Now to simplify your miss understanding, if what you said about off by 3 then the position of the interface (order) in the declaration will matter, and that can't be, right ?

Hi, VMT is not a problem here, VMT for such interfaces are different beast from VMT for objects/classes, VMT tables with COM interfaces (interfaces with GUID which i like to call "named interfaces" or "IDed interfaces") are separated into their own tables identified by their GUID, even for one object/interface, so VMT will be alright no matter what inheritance is there, also VMT for each interface are agnostic for other GUID declaration. As for the interfaces you listed IInterface and IUnknown, this might be a problem as they declared with the same GUID (TGUID) hence they will compete to replace one another, they are identical in structure but different in parameters (declaration), so they will work unless the compiler will complain about stuff like Integer vs Cardinal or TGUID vs PGUID..., the problem here is how compiler see them and when. I might be wrong here, but the fix should be removing Windows.Foundation.IUnknown , in other words, the already known interfaces should not be redeclared/generated.

Also i can't help here, but have question; Are these repositories referring to the same QuickJS ? https://github.com/mengmo/QuickJS-Windows-Build https://github.com/Coldzer0/QuickJS-Pascal

No sure i do understand that, but lets say on single core the test will yield similar result to the article, meaning Sleep(0) is magnitude slower than Sleep(1) and SwitchToThread, then that OS should not be working at all ! and if worked then it will be slower than computer in 70s and 80s, i mean less than 10Mhz CPU.

Spent two hours trying to reproduce anything close to that mentioned article https://joeduffyblog.com/2006/08/22/priorityinduced-starvation-why-sleep1-is-better-than-sleep0-and-the-windows-balance-set-manager/ I read that article years ago, many years, yet i couldn't reproduce anything even small hint if that is the case with Sleep(0) vs Sleep(1) vs SwitchToThread, So i just wrote two tests, one is mimicking the starvation pointed and presented in the article producer/consumer, and the other just how efficient these three method. Also to be clear, i am not saying the article is misleading or wrong, but it is most likely testing different thing completely (namely the efficiency of ThreadPool in C# in 2006), or the test is happening is single core CPU belongs to past and gone era, know this Sleep(1) by definition can't perform less than OS timer granularity which is by default 1000/64 seconds almost 15-16 ms, and in best case scenario it will be 1 ms, this is guaranteed by the OS, so the article result is irrelevant today. First test program ThreadIterationTest; {$APPTYPE CONSOLE} uses System.SysUtils, System.Classes, Winapi.Windows; {$WARN SYMBOL_PLATFORM OFF} type TSwitchMethod = (smSleep0, smSleep1, smSwitchToThread); TCounterThread = class(TThread) private FSwitchMethod: TSwitchMethod; FIterationCount: Int64; FDuration: Integer; procedure Execute; override; public constructor Create(SwitchMethod: TSwitchMethod; Duration: Integer; Priority: TThreadPriority); property IterationCount: Int64 read FIterationCount; property SwitchMethod: TSwitchMethod read FSwitchMethod; end; constructor TCounterThread.Create(SwitchMethod: TSwitchMethod; Duration: Integer; Priority: TThreadPriority); begin inherited Create(True); // Create suspended FSwitchMethod := SwitchMethod; FDuration := Duration; FIterationCount := 0; Self.Priority := Priority; FreeOnTerminate := True; end; procedure TCounterThread.Execute; var StartTick, Duration: Cardinal; begin Duration := FDuration * 1000; StartTick := GetTickCount; while (GetTickCount - StartTick) < Duration do begin Inc(FIterationCount); case FSwitchMethod of {(*} smSleep0: Sleep(0); smSleep1: Sleep(1); smSwitchToThread: SwitchToThread; {*)} end; end; end; function ThPriorityToString(ThProirity: TThreadPriority): string; var P: Integer; begin case ThProirity of {(*} tpIdle: Result:= 'Idle'; tpLowest: Result:= 'Lowest'; tpLower: Result:= 'Lower'; tpNormal: Result:= 'Normal'; tpHigher: Result:= 'Higher'; tpHighest: Result:= 'Highest'; tpTimeCritical: Result:= 'TimeCritical'; {*)} else Result := 'Unknown'; end; Result := Result + '('; case ThProirity of {(*} tpIdle: P:= THREAD_PRIORITY_IDLE; tpLowest: P:= THREAD_PRIORITY_LOWEST; tpLower: P:= THREAD_PRIORITY_BELOW_NORMAL; tpNormal: P:= THREAD_PRIORITY_NORMAL; tpHigher: P:= THREAD_PRIORITY_ABOVE_NORMAL; tpHighest: P:= THREAD_PRIORITY_HIGHEST; tpTimeCritical: P:= THREAD_PRIORITY_TIME_CRITICAL; {*)} else P := 999; end; Result := Result + IntToStr(P) + ')'; end; procedure RunTest(Duration: Integer; Priority1, Priority2, Priority3: TThreadPriority); var Thread1, Thread2, Thread3: TCounterThread; begin Writeln('Starting test with duration: ', Duration, ' seconds'); Writeln('Thread priorities: Sleep(0)=', ThPriorityToString(Priority1), ', Sleep(1)=', ThPriorityToString(Priority2), ', SwitchToThread=', ThPriorityToString(Priority3)); Thread1 := TCounterThread.Create(smSleep0, Duration, Priority1); Thread2 := TCounterThread.Create(smSleep1, Duration, Priority2); Thread3 := TCounterThread.Create(smSwitchToThread, Duration, Priority3); Thread1.Start; Thread2.Start; Thread3.Start; WaitForSingleObject(Thread1.Handle, INFINITE); WaitForSingleObject(Thread2.Handle, INFINITE); WaitForSingleObject(Thread3.Handle, INFINITE); Writeln('Results:'); Writeln('Sleep(0) iterations: ', Thread1.IterationCount); Writeln('Sleep(1) iterations: ', Thread2.IterationCount); Writeln('SwitchToThread iterations: ', Thread3.IterationCount); Writeln; end; begin try Writeln('Test 1: All threads with normal priority'); RunTest(3, tpNormal, tpNormal, tpNormal); Writeln('Test 1.1: All threads with normal priority'); RunTest(1, tpNormal, tpNormal, tpNormal); Writeln('Test 1.5: All threads with normal priority'); RunTest(5, tpNormal, tpNormal, tpNormal); Writeln('Test 2: Different priorities'); RunTest(5, tpHigher, tpNormal, tpLower); Writeln('Test 3: Different priorities'); RunTest(5, tpLowest, tpHighest, tpNormal); Writeln('Test 4: Different priorities'); RunTest(5, tpLowest, tpLowest, tpLowest); Writeln('Done.'); Readln; except on E: Exception do Writeln(E.ClassName, ': ', E.Message); end; end. Its result on my device Test 1: All threads with normal priority Starting test with duration: 3 seconds Thread priorities: Sleep(0)=Normal(0), Sleep(1)=Normal(0), SwitchToThread=Normal(0) Results: Sleep(0) iterations: 15700875 Sleep(1) iterations: 175 SwitchToThread iterations: 19869985 Test 1.1: All threads with normal priority Starting test with duration: 1 seconds Thread priorities: Sleep(0)=Normal(0), Sleep(1)=Normal(0), SwitchToThread=Normal(0) Results: Sleep(0) iterations: 5266693 Sleep(1) iterations: 60 SwitchToThread iterations: 6658333 Test 1.5: All threads with normal priority Starting test with duration: 5 seconds Thread priorities: Sleep(0)=Normal(0), Sleep(1)=Normal(0), SwitchToThread=Normal(0) Results: Sleep(0) iterations: 26351894 Sleep(1) iterations: 269 SwitchToThread iterations: 33344803 Test 2: Different priorities Starting test with duration: 5 seconds Thread priorities: Sleep(0)=Higher(1), Sleep(1)=Normal(0), SwitchToThread=Lower(-1) Results: Sleep(0) iterations: 26332342 Sleep(1) iterations: 299 SwitchToThread iterations: 33324362 Test 3: Different priorities Starting test with duration: 5 seconds Thread priorities: Sleep(0)=Lowest(-2), Sleep(1)=Highest(2), SwitchToThread=Normal(0) Results: Sleep(0) iterations: 26220753 Sleep(1) iterations: 299 SwitchToThread iterations: 33216074 Test 4: Different priorities Starting test with duration: 5 seconds Thread priorities: Sleep(0)=Lowest(-2), Sleep(1)=Lowest(-2), SwitchToThread=Lowest(-2) Results: Sleep(0) iterations: 26350390 Sleep(1) iterations: 291 SwitchToThread iterations: 33374685 Done. Sleep(1) is in the expected range of 60-64 per second Now different test to emulate the article example, not using Delphi RTL thread pool and anonymous thread, because i never trust them on my XE8. program ThreadStarvationTest; {$APPTYPE CONSOLE} uses System.SysUtils, System.Classes, Winapi.Windows; {$WARN SYMBOL_PLATFORM OFF} type TYieldMethod = (ymSleep0, ymSleep1, ymSwitchToThread); TStarvationThread = class(TThread) private FYieldMethod: TYieldMethod; FIsProducer: Boolean; FDuration: Cardinal; procedure Execute; override; public constructor Create(YieldMethod: TYieldMethod; IsProducer: Boolean; Priority: TThreadPriority); property Duration: Cardinal read FDuration; end; var x: Integer = 0; constructor TStarvationThread.Create(YieldMethod: TYieldMethod; IsProducer: Boolean; Priority: TThreadPriority); begin inherited Create(True); FYieldMethod := YieldMethod; FIsProducer := IsProducer; Self.Priority := Priority; //FreeOnTerminate := True; // don't care, irrelevant FDuration := 0; end; procedure TStarvationThread.Execute; var StartTick: Cardinal; begin // run threads on one core, core 0 SetThreadAffinityMask(GetCurrentThread, 1); if FIsProducer then begin //Sleep(50); // Sleep(500); // Sleep(1500); x := 1; // Producer sets x end else begin StartTick := GetTickCount; while x = 0 do begin case FYieldMethod of ymSleep0: Sleep(0); ymSleep1: Sleep(1); ymSwitchToThread: SwitchToThread; end; end; FDuration := GetTickCount - StartTick; end; end; function ThPriorityToString(ThPriority: TThreadPriority): string; var P: Integer; begin case ThPriority of {(*} tpIdle: Result := 'Idle'; tpLowest: Result := 'Lowest'; tpLower: Result := 'Lower'; tpNormal: Result := 'Normal'; tpHigher: Result := 'Higher'; tpHighest: Result := 'Highest'; tpTimeCritical: Result := 'TimeCritical'; {*)} else Result := 'Unknown'; end; Result := Result + '('; case ThPriority of {(*} tpIdle: P := THREAD_PRIORITY_IDLE; tpLowest: P := THREAD_PRIORITY_LOWEST; tpLower: P := THREAD_PRIORITY_BELOW_NORMAL; tpNormal: P := THREAD_PRIORITY_NORMAL; tpHigher: P := THREAD_PRIORITY_ABOVE_NORMAL; tpHighest: P := THREAD_PRIORITY_HIGHEST; tpTimeCritical: P := THREAD_PRIORITY_TIME_CRITICAL; {*)} else P := 999; end; Result := Result + IntToStr(P) + ')'; end; function YieldMethodToStr(YieldMethod:TYieldMethod):string; begin case YieldMethod of {(*} ymSleep0: Result := 'Sleep(0)'; ymSleep1: Result := 'Sleep(1)'; ymSwitchToThread: Result := 'SwitchToThread'; {*)} end; end; procedure RunStarvationTest(YieldMethod: TYieldMethod; ConsumerPriority, ProducerPriority: TThreadPriority); var Consumer, Producer: TStarvationThread; begin Writeln('Starting starvation test with ', YieldMethodToStr(YieldMethod), ', Consumer=', ThPriorityToString(ConsumerPriority), ', Producer=', ThPriorityToString(ProducerPriority)); x := 0; Consumer := TStarvationThread.Create(YieldMethod, False, ConsumerPriority); Producer := TStarvationThread.Create(YieldMethod, True, ProducerPriority); Consumer.Start; Producer.Start; Consumer.WaitFor; Producer.WaitFor; Writeln('Result: ', YieldMethodToStr(YieldMethod), ' time: ', Consumer.Duration, ' ms'); Writeln; end; begin try // Test Sleep(0) with equal priorities RunStarvationTest(ymSleep0, tpNormal, tpNormal); // Test Sleep(0) with different priorities RunStarvationTest(ymSleep0, tpNormal, tpLower); // Test Sleep(0) with different priorities RunStarvationTest(ymSleep0, tpLower, tpNormal); // Test Sleep(1) with equal priorities RunStarvationTest(ymSleep1, tpNormal, tpNormal); // Test Sleep(1) with different priorities RunStarvationTest(ymSleep1, tpNormal, tpLower); // Test Sleep(1) with different priorities RunStarvationTest(ymSleep1, tpLower, tpNormal); // Test SwitchToThread with equal priorities RunStarvationTest(ymSwitchToThread, tpNormal, tpNormal); // Test SwitchToThread with different priorities RunStarvationTest(ymSwitchToThread, tpNormal, tpLower); // Test SwitchToThread with different priorities RunStarvationTest(ymSwitchToThread, tpLower, tpNormal); Writeln('Done.'); Readln; except on E: Exception do Writeln(E.ClassName, ': ', E.Message); end; end. Its result with and without delaying the producer by uncommenting the Sleep(50).. no starvation observed at all and the result is consistent with the delay introduced being Sleep(50), Sleep(500) or Sleep(1500) Starting starvation test with Sleep(0), Consumer=Normal(0), Producer=Normal(0) Result: Sleep(0) time: 0 ms Starting starvation test with Sleep(0), Consumer=Normal(0), Producer=Lower(-1) Result: Sleep(0) time: 0 ms Starting starvation test with Sleep(0), Consumer=Lower(-1), Producer=Normal(0) Result: Sleep(0) time: 0 ms Starting starvation test with Sleep(1), Consumer=Normal(0), Producer=Normal(0) Result: Sleep(1) time: 0 ms Starting starvation test with Sleep(1), Consumer=Normal(0), Producer=Lower(-1) Result: Sleep(1) time: 15 ms Starting starvation test with Sleep(1), Consumer=Lower(-1), Producer=Normal(0) Result: Sleep(1) time: 0 ms Starting starvation test with SwitchToThread, Consumer=Normal(0), Producer=Normal(0) Result: SwitchToThread time: 0 ms Starting starvation test with SwitchToThread, Consumer=Normal(0), Producer=Lower(-1) Result: SwitchToThread time: 0 ms Starting starvation test with SwitchToThread, Consumer=Lower(-1), Producer=Normal(0) Result: SwitchToThread time: 0 ms Done. True, there is no silver bullet, but Sleep(1) is better for completely different reason and it is impossible to be less than 1ms delay, unless with my vivid imagination your PC has no other threads running, like the OS has nothing else to do, so it will be faced with either 1) put the CPU/core to sleep, i mean really sleep signal and reduce the power for the core. 2) ignore the delay continue, even in this case, the article result can't be reproduce because we have two threads not one, hence the producer will execute releasing the consumer. ps: these tests are for specific measurement, and i know they are not very helpful in real life, but they are accurate in the delays and shows how SwitchToThread is faster then Sleep(0), due the reduced context switch with threads from different processes, as for mixing the priorities, well this is way different subject and longer, but even so as tests shows it is irrelevant with Windows 10 and modern CPU, my CPU is Sandy Bridge so around 15 years old. I would love to see result form modern and different CPUs, just for general information, also from different Windows versions, that would be nice, the discussion of how much relevant the test in real life doesn't concern me, as i am trying to replicate that article strange result.

Sure, if Task Manager is causing freeze then 1) the system is broken and faulty and missing components, 2) it could be that or your devices is infected with malicious software, or 3) have you installed 17 Antivirus ? then uninstalled some or all of them ? this symptoms could be coming from rouge left over filter drivers, Fix your Windows, Delphi and Embarcadero (in this case) has nothing to do with your problem.

Dear Angus try the RAW approach for fun, and see how those can be f*** brutal.

Right, but doesn't really cost your server that much resource ? To put it in different way, without too much explanation of the last one i point to in (D) , see, raw packets are always useless with TCP as any switch/router will drop them as they don't belong to any steam, namely established TCP stream, but and here big bug the connection is there and established, the stream is legit, and your packet will reach its destination, can cause resource depletion on their part as you closed ( terminate abruptly) the connection after sending that packet or similar ones, even you keep yours open and repeat this behavior it becomes more like contest of whos bone is tougher, your server with usual resources, their part with havoc and unpredictable behavior to manage.

You lost me here. What 10m, and what's gps? Honestly i lost my self reading that, fps not gps, (stupid auto correct and clumsy fingers), and 10m=10000000 vs 1m =1000000, as dominator for the rate at setup.

@Angus Robertson I know a few tricks, funny ones and one might say genius while laughing at them, used some and still using in production, but they are not for public or posting in a forum, so i am writing in private to you, you can do them as they are very simple, they are just like step back a little and look at the big picture.