From owner-freebsd-arch  Wed Jun 21 12:18:57 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 899FB37B951
	for <arch@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 12:18:55 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from bright@fw.wintelcom.net)
Received: (from bright@localhost)
	by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id e5LJIsO25288;
	Wed, 21 Jun 2000 12:18:54 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 12:18:54 -0700
From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
To: Paul Saab <paul@mu.org>
Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: MORE: Re: kblob discussion.
Message-ID: <20000621121854.W17420@fw.wintelcom.net>
References: <20000619111309.E26801@fw.wintelcom.net> <xzpk8fktu2x.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <20000620093526.Q17420@fw.wintelcom.net> <20000620123206.A56823@elvis.mu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i
In-Reply-To: <20000620123206.A56823@elvis.mu.org>; from paul@mu.org on Tue, Jun 20, 2000 at 12:32:06PM -0700
Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

* Paul Saab <paul@mu.org> [000620 12:34] wrote:
> > 
> > Sendfile's vm tricks and additional overhead per-page sized chunks
> > make it unsuitable for sending smaller chunks of data.  Paul Saab
> > noticed that for some workloads it was actually slower than just
> > copying the data while working at Hotmail.
> 
> I was talking with dg last week and we may have found a flaw in the way
> that I measured the speed.  I am fairly convinced now that sendfile is
> the prefered way to send data from a file.

Can you elaborate on that?  You're saying kblob is not necessary?

How was the sendfile testing flawed?

-Alfred


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message