当epoll可用时，epoll会完全取代select / poll吗？(could epoll totally replace select/poll when it is available?)

 我是插座新手，我正在学习/阅读一些epoll材料和代码。 我的问题是，当epoll在系统（Linux）中可用时，epoll可以完全取代select / poll吗？ 
 
 我认为套接字编程也应该在实践中遵循一些范例。 当我阅读代码时，我发现一些“选择”带有“epoll”： 
 
 
 
 服务器代码在处理阻塞套接字时使用select。 我认为epoll（LT）的行为与select相同，所以可以使用epoll替换所有select。 
 
 
 一些遗留代码使用epoll进行监控。 事件返回后，在相应的fd上使用select以在读/写之前“检查”它。 我不太确定这个“选择”的含义。 
 
 
 我对这些“选择”代码感到困惑，希望有人可以提供帮助。 

i am new to sockets and i am learning/reading some epoll materials and codes. My questions is that could epoll totally replace select/poll when epoll is available in system(Linux)? 
 
i think socket programming also should have some paradigms to follow in practice. When i was reading codes, i find some "select" with "epoll":
 
 
 
a server code use select when it deals with blocking socket. I think epoll(LT) behaves just the same as select so it is ok to use epoll to replace all select.
 
 
some legacy code use epoll to monitor. After events returns, select is used on corresponding fd to "check" it just before read/write. i am not quite sure the meaning of this "select".
 
 
i am confused about these "select" code and hope someone can help.

原文：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/10119860