From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 17 Jan 2001 16:52:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 17 Jan 2001 16:52:27 -0500 Received: from mta6.snfc21.pbi.net ([206.13.28.240]:27779 "EHLO mta6.snfc21.pbi.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 17 Jan 2001 16:52:17 -0500 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 13:51:31 -0800 From: Dan Kegel Subject: Re: [Fwd: [Fwd: Is sendfile all that sexy? (fwd)]] To: dean-list-linux-kernel@arctic.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tony Finch Reply-to: dank@alumni.caltech.edu Message-id: <3A6613E3.218F588C@alumni.caltech.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Accept-Language: en Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Dean Gaudet wrote: > consider the case where you're responding to a pair of pipelined HTTP/1.1 > requests. with the HPUX and BSD sendfile() APIs you end up forcing a > packet boundary between the two responses. this is likely to result in > one small packet on the wire after each response. > > with the linux TCP_CORK API you only get one trailing small packet Tony Finch tells me that BSD also supports TCP_CORK; in fact, it had it first. He wrote: > BSDs that include T/TCP (pretty much all of them since 1995) have an > option called TCP_NOPUSH which is equivalent to Linux's TCP_CORK. A > pity the Linux people didn't know about it when they implemented their > version. > > #if defined(TCP_CORK) && !defined(TCP_NOPUSH) > #define TCP_NOPUSH TCP_CORK > #endif Can anyone verify it resolves the problem Dean pointed out? Now, Linus, does that make you hate BSD less? :-) - Dan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/