"Hans Müller" wrote in message
news:4a37b18d$0$3283$8e6e7...@newsreader.ewetel.de...
> Small addition:
>
> While tracing the network data I found the server to be the problem,
> the answer to a request is beeing delayed by about 180ms - no idea why.
Nagle's algorithm: you've unintentionally pro
On Jun 16, 12:51 pm, Hans Müller wrote:
> Richard,
>
> thanks a lot for your hint, that was completely new for me.
> Nagle's optimisation is definitely a good idea in most cases.
>
> By the way, do you have an idea how to access the underlying socket to modify
> the behavier
> via the setsockopt
Richard,
thanks a lot for your hint, that was completely new for me.
Nagle's optimisation is definitely a good idea in most cases.
By the way, do you have an idea how to access the underlying socket to modify
the behavier
via the setsockopt function to disable Nagle's algorythm in my special ca
Hey Hans,
Try reversing the list of numbers and see if anything changes.
Cheers,
Brian
Hans Müller wrote:
Hello,
I found a timing problem while playing with the xmlrpx stuff.
I created a very simple server, running on a network node on windows.
The client runs on windows or linux. It runs a
Another addendum...
while running again the server code on a linux host,
the times are as expected.
started...
Checking with 100240
time for 10 loops: 2.844000
Checking with 10240
time for 10 loops: 0.39
Checking with 1024
time for 10 loops: 0.078000
Checking with 512
time for 10 loops: 0.0
Small addition:
While tracing the network data I found the server to be the problem,
the answer to a request is beeing delayed by about 180ms - no idea why.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Hello,
I found a timing problem while playing with the xmlrpx stuff.
I created a very simple server, running on a network node on windows.
The client runs on windows or linux. It runs a very simple test function on the
server
which just echos a passed string. The trip time is beeing measured.
W
