Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 28 May 2003 11:35:57 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Marc Slemko <marcs@znep.com>
To:        Igor Sysoev <is@rambler-co.ru>
Cc:        arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: sendfile(2) SF_NOPUSH flag proposal
Message-ID:  <Pine.NEB.4.53.0305281125460.28029@rhombus.znep.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0305282219570.51226-100000@is>
References:  <Pine.BSF.4.21.0305282219570.51226-100000@is>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 28 May 2003, Igor Sysoev wrote:

> No, I do want these flags because they resolve the problem of partially
> filled packets.  I believe that this problem can be solved without a fixing
> the sendfile() implementation.

As people have said a few times now, making an API change to work
around a bug in the implementation of sendfile() simply doesn't
make any sense, especially when there are other workarounds you
can use until it is fixed that impose a very low overhead.  No one
is saying it can't be solved without fixing sendfile(), we are just
saying it _shouldn't_ be because any API changes will be around for
a very long time.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.4.53.0305281125460.28029>