From dev-return-8716-apmail-apr-dev-archive=apr.apache.org@apr.apache.org Fri Dec 13 17:04:35 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 37910 invoked by uid 500); 13 Dec 2002 17:04:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 37898 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 17:04:34 -0000 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:11:12 -0800 (PST) From: X-X-Sender: To: Subject: APR_TCP_NOPUSH Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N This concept is not portable at all as far as I know, so why do we expose it in our API? My understanding of TCP_NOPUSH is that it is how linux implements sendfile. If that is the case, then it should be removed from our public API, and we should just use it behind the scenes. If that isn't the case, then can somebody please explain how an application that uses APR_TCP_NOPUSH is at all portable? Once that flag is used, the application will behave differently on many platforms. I would like to remove that macro later this weekend, so please let me know if that will be an issue. Ryan