From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Nov 14 13:16:11 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA06440 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 13:16:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from austin.polstra.com (austin.polstra.com [206.213.73.10]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA06399 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 13:15:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from austin.polstra.com (jdp@localhost) by austin.polstra.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA10054; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 13:15:38 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199611142115.NAA10054@austin.polstra.com> To: "Marc G. Fournier" cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Sockets question... In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 14 Nov 1996 16:10:34 EST." References: Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 13:15:38 -0800 From: John Polstra Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Ack...that sounds like exactly the problem...I misunderstood > the read() call :( > > Why does 512k work fine though? no data lose at all.... > > I'm going to code in your suggestion above, but I'm very > curious now as to why 512bytes and 80bytes both work cleanly, but > 256bytes "loses" data... It depends on so many things, all timing related. Tomorrow you might try it again and see it behave entirely differently. Run the server on a machine on the other side of the Internet, and it will behave differently still. You just can't reliably predict what it's going to do. John -- John Polstra jdp@polstra.com John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA "Self-knowledge is always bad news." -- John Barth