From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Dec 28 14:38: 9 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from tao.org.uk (genius.tao.org.uk [212.135.162.51])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68F2837B41B
	for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 14:38:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: by tao.org.uk (Postfix, from userid 100)
	id 6C8112B9; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 22:37:54 +0000 (GMT)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 22:37:54 +0000
From: Josef Karthauser <joe@tao.org.uk>
To: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com>
Cc: Tomas Svensson <tsn@gbdev.net>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: FreeBSD performing worse than Linux?
Message-ID: <20011228223754.E1238@tao.org.uk>
Mail-Followup-To: Josef Karthauser <joe@tao.org.uk>,
	Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com>, Tomas Svensson <tsn@gbdev.net>,
	freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
References: <20011228192736.A22545@simba.systemteknik.net> <Pine.BSF.4.30.0112281734020.92969-100000@niwun.pair.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="bi5JUZtvcfApsciF"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.30.0112281734020.92969-100000@niwun.pair.com>; from silby@silby.com on Fri, Dec 28, 2001 at 05:36:22PM -0500
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-hackers.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-hackers>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-hackers>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG


--bi5JUZtvcfApsciF
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Dec 28, 2001 at 05:36:22PM -0500, Mike Silbersack wrote:
>=20
> I'd have to agree.  I just recompiled libssh / sshd so that NODELAY would
> not be set in any case, and ls acts a lot more nicely over a modem link.
> (2 large updates, rather than lots of tiny ones.)  I'm not sure that we're
> seeing any actual bug in the tcp stack here as much as the effect of
> packet loss and tinygrams.
>=20

Packet loss is, or should be, next to zero as both machines are on
an uncongested 10base ether on my local network.

Joe

--bi5JUZtvcfApsciF
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iEYEARECAAYFAjws9EEACgkQXVIcjOaxUBYPZACgsfRhjOj0C5eMlepicdPvxCCk
l7kAnA82hxO2zRRnSnyB5vAFANM6XSmX
=GYzu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--bi5JUZtvcfApsciF--

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