On Mon, 13 Sep 2010, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> Preliminary testing (with WITNESS and INVARIANTS enabled) has shown stable
> operation and a rough doubling of the throughput on loopback connections.
> I've tested most socket teardown cases and it behaves fine. I'm not entirely
> sure I've got all p
on 15/09/2010 19:00 Andre Oppermann said the following:
> Is there a quick way of deciding within sendfile(2) whether a file resides
> on a filesystem that doesn't use the buffer cache?
I don't know of any reliable way to do it.
--
Andriy Gapon
___
fre
On 15.09.2010 17:38, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 15/09/2010 18:15 Andriy Gapon said the following:
on 15/09/2010 18:04 Steven Hartland said the following:
Hmm, so taking a different track on the issue is the a way to make sendfile use
data
directly from ARC instead of having to copy it first?
Wel
on 15/09/2010 18:15 Andriy Gapon said the following:
> on 15/09/2010 18:04 Steven Hartland said the following:
>> Hmm, so taking a different track on the issue is the a way to make sendfile
>> use data
>> directly from ARC instead of having to copy it first?
>
> Well, theoretically everything is
On 15.09.2010 17:19, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On Mon, 13 Sep 2010, Andre Oppermann wrote:
Hey,
When a TCP connection via loopback back to localhost is made the whole
send, segmentation and receive path (with larger packets though) is still
executed. This has some considerable overhead.
To short-
On Mon, 13 Sep 2010, Andre Oppermann wrote:
Hey,
When a TCP connection via loopback back to localhost is made the whole
send, segmentation and receive path (with larger packets though) is still
executed. This has some considerable overhead.
To short-circuit the send and receive sockets on loc
