Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 14:50:17 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: khetan@chain.iafrica.com (Khetan Gajjar) Cc: terry@lambert.org, mark@grondar.za, questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Problems Message-ID: <199603122150.OAA06658@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960312202916.202A-100000@chain.iafrica.com> from "Khetan Gajjar" at Mar 12, 96 08:30:51 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > The advantage is they enable transactioning. You'd need to read the > > new Steven's book for a full explanation, but basically, it cuts > > packet overhead in about half. > > This machine is not on a network; so, as I understand it, don't need > it with PPP ? Transactioning is an optimization for things like WWW, finger, and FTP data connections. It could help PPP for these things, but PPP compression can't interoperate without seperating out the compression flag from the timer. Right now it only hurts PPP performance (assuming you are using compression). > > There was a discussion of this on the -hackers list a while back, asking > > about relative compression statistics when compared to Linux. The Linux > > numbers were several orders of magnitude better (ie: compression was > > used more frequently) than BSD because of the compression defeat cause > > by the header "changes" by T/TCP. > > So i.o.w disabling this will make the BSD speed comparable to Linux ? It will make BSD do the same things Linux does with regard to the decision on a packet-by-packet basis whether or not to do the compression. In theory, the BSD system should outperform the Linux because of other factors in the networking code. But I'm not about to write you a guarantee on that. 8-). Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603122150.OAA06658>