On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 10:27:35 -0800 Rick Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Part of the issue is that NODELAY has dual meaning. It means don't delay > > acks (on receiver), and don't coalesce writes (on sender). If java > > didn't turn on NODELAY, it would get coalescing but it would then get > > delayed acks. > > Ah, this is the first time I've heard that TCP_NODELAY on a receiver > would alter the ACK policy. I don't think it does that on other stacks. > That sounds like a nasty double-whammy when both sides are using it. I'm wrong, the option to turn off delayed acks is TCP_QUICKACK - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
