[lkml]   [2001]   [Jan]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [Fwd: [Fwd: Is sendfile all that sexy? (fwd)]]
On Thu, 18 Jan 2001, Zach Brown wrote:

> We set TCP_CORK on the socket we handed to external programs that were
> being run via 'site exec' in an ftp server. It resulted in much nicer
> packets being spit out, especially in the 'ls' case where it likes to
> write() on really goofy boundaries.
> [yes, ftp and 'site exec' in particular are far from sexy, but do the same
> with CGI scripts and the world might care :)]

actually in apache we deliberately writev() on (essentially) the same
boundaries the CGI passed to us.

the reason, gag puke, is for doing things such as sending "activity"
progress -- like a line at a time or whatever to indicate that the CGI is
there and still working.

this is obviously something that we really should enable nagle for, and
we've been in a dilemma of whether to nagle or not in this case for a few
years. we want to not nagle if the CGI is bulk... we want to nagle if the
CGI is a dribbler (because that's what nagle is for).

CORK would probably be wrong for us.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:28    [W:0.501 / U:3.608 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site