Message183607
| Author |
giampaolo.rodola |
| Recipients |
eric.araujo, giampaolo.rodola, neologix, pitrou, rosslagerwall |
| Date |
2013年03月06日.18:09:57 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1362593397.98.0.766187186143.issue13564@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
Specifying a big blocksize doesn't mean the transfer will be faster.
send/sendfile won't send more than a certain amount of bytes anyways.
If I'm not mistaken I recall from previous benchmarks that after a certain point (131072 or something) increasing the blocksize results in equal or even worse performances.
Another thing I don't like is that by doing so you implicitly assume that the file is "fstat-eable". I don't know if there are cases where it's not, but the less assumptions we do the better.
Note: I'm sure that for both send() and sendfile() blocksize>=65536 is faster than blocksize=8192 (the current default) so it probably makes sense to change that (I'll file a separate issue). |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2013年03月06日 18:09:58 | giampaolo.rodola | set | recipients:
+ giampaolo.rodola, pitrou, eric.araujo, neologix, rosslagerwall |
| 2013年03月06日 18:09:57 | giampaolo.rodola | set | messageid: <1362593397.98.0.766187186143.issue13564@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2013年03月06日 18:09:57 | giampaolo.rodola | link | issue13564 messages |
| 2013年03月06日 18:09:57 | giampaolo.rodola | create |
|