Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 15 Jan 2012 00:58:02 -0500
From:      Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com>
To:        Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@freebsd.org>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r230118 - head/bin/sh
Message-ID:  <CAF6rxgnw-duMzh540D_ZNmhsdRb2h7gB0JN0j693XLyUoj0Rvw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <201201142246.q0EMkI6P052011@svn.freebsd.org>
References:  <201201142246.q0EMkI6P052011@svn.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@freebsd.org> wrote=
:
> Author: jilles
> Date: Sat Jan 14 22:46:18 2012
> New Revision: 230118
> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/230118
>
> Log:
> =C2=A0sh: Change input buffer size from 1023 to 1024.
>
> =C2=A0PR: =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 bin/161756

On Wed Oct 19 22:33:38 UTC 2011 you said in the PR:

Although this change looks like an improvement, it does not seem
fully satisfying. I would like to see performance numbers for the
change on your slow embedded platform. Also, why use 1023 or 1024?
Another buffer size may be better.

But the PR does not seem to answer the question. Can you explain why
you decided to act on the PR now?

--=20
Eitan Adler



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF6rxgnw-duMzh540D_ZNmhsdRb2h7gB0JN0j693XLyUoj0Rvw>