From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 22 03:02:33 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D00B916A4CE for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 03:02:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from hetzner.co.za (lfw.hetzner.co.za [196.7.18.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C0F943D31 for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 03:02:32 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ianf@hetzner.co.za) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by hetzner.co.za with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1AjcbI-00050I-00; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 13:02:16 +0200 To: "Poul-Henning Kamp" From: Ian Freislich In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 19 Jan 2004 22:13:37 +0100." <98907.1074546817@critter.freebsd.dk> X-Attribution: BOFH Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 13:02:16 +0200 Sender: ianf@hetzner.co.za Message-Id: cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is BUFSIZ too small ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 11:02:34 -0000 "Poul-Henning Kamp" wrote: > In message <200401192111.i0JLBYVk004060@apollo.backplane.com>, Matthew Dillon w > rites: > > > >:I noticed that we still have BUFSIZ in stdio.h defined to only 1024, > >:and wonder if that should be increased these days. > >: > >:Is there anybody who could devise and run some benchmarks to find > >:out what effect it would have to increase it to for instance 4096 ? > >: > >:-- > >:Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 > >:phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 > > > > Very few programs use BUFSIZ for the actual I/O ops [...] > > I share many of your doubts, but I would still like to see some > benchmarks :-) Perhaps ftp is one of those things that uses BUFSIZ for the actual I/O ops. All of it's reads and writes if you truss it are 1024 bytes which impacts its performance (here at least). -- Ian Freislich