From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 12 11:42:35 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79667106568B for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:42:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-hackers@m.gmane.org) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36B6D8FC1B for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:42:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1MxJIG-0007x8-67 for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:42:24 +0200 Received: from lara.cc.fer.hr ([161.53.72.113]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:42:24 +0200 Received: from ivoras by lara.cc.fer.hr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:42:24 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org From: Ivan Voras Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:42:08 +0200 Lines: 15 Message-ID: References: <20091012113619.GN48396@cicely7.cicely.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: lara.cc.fer.hr User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090928) In-Reply-To: <20091012113619.GN48396@cicely7.cicely.de> Sender: news Subject: Re: "global" TCP_NODELAY? X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:42:35 -0000 Bernd Walter wrote: > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 01:27:28PM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote: >> I'm trying to work around some extreme brain damageness in PHP (yes, it >> sucks) which doesn't have a way to set TCP_NODELAY on stream sockets so >> I'm wondering what are my other options? Is there a way to set >> TCP_NODELAY system-wide? > > net.inet.tcp.delayed_ack > net.inet.tcp.delacktime > > Depending on your application it may be sufficient to just reduce the > time. Really? Doesn't TCP_NODELAY (Nagle's algorithm) work on buffers to be sent rather than on ACKs on received data?