Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 13:28:52 +0100 From: Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl> To: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r230118 - head/bin/sh Message-ID: <20120115122852.GA63181@stack.nl> In-Reply-To: <CAF6rxgnw-duMzh540D_ZNmhsdRb2h7gB0JN0j693XLyUoj0Rvw@mail.gmail.com> References: <201201142246.q0EMkI6P052011@svn.freebsd.org> <CAF6rxgnw-duMzh540D_ZNmhsdRb2h7gB0JN0j693XLyUoj0Rvw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 12:58:02AM -0500, Eitan Adler wrote: > On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@freebsd.org> wrote: > > Author: jilles > > Date: Sat Jan 14 22:46:18 2012 > > New Revision: 230118 > > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/230118 > > > > Log: > > sh: Change input buffer size from 1023 to 1024. > > > > PR: bin/161756 > On Wed Oct 19 22:33:38 UTC 2011 you said in the PR: > Although this change looks like an improvement, it does not seem > fully satisfying. I would like to see performance numbers for the > change on your slow embedded platform. Also, why use 1023 or 1024? > Another buffer size may be better. > But the PR does not seem to answer the question. Can you explain why > you decided to act on the PR now? Because the submitter did not want to run benchmarks for this, and it looked useful anyway. -- Jilles Tjoelker
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120115122852.GA63181>