From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 3 09:01:13 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 9A9EF16A4CE; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 09:01:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.des.no (flood.des.no [217.116.83.31]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44E8043D66; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 09:00:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: by smtp.des.no (Pony Express, from userid 666) id 963BE5309; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 18:00:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from dwp.des.no (des.no [80.203.228.37]) by smtp.des.no (Pony Express) with ESMTP id B47B25308; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 18:00:23 +0100 (CET) Received: by dwp.des.no (Postfix, from userid 2602) id 4310B33C6A; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 18:00:23 +0100 (CET) To: Robert Watson References: From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 18:00:23 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Robert Watson's message of "Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:54:11 -0500 (EST)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.090024 (Oort Gnus v0.24) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on flood.des.no X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.63 cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Coalescing pipe allocation 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: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 17:01:13 -0000 Robert Watson writes: > Well, I don't know so much about the portability issues, but I can say > that it seems silly to incur the costs if few applications take advantage > of the feature. Especially if the cost can be defered until the feature > is exercised. I have some local patches that defer all pipe buffer > allocation until a particular direction is first used, but this has some > potential downsides, including increasing the chances that a lack of > resources is discovered on first-use, rather than on allocation of the > pipe (which makes it a lot harder to write robust applications). This is IMHO a lesser evil than the current behaviour, and there is always the option of blocking if memory can't be allocated right away. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no