Message-Id: <199702090854.BAA14054@pooh.pageplus.com>
To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com
Subject: Re: [BUG]: "Argument passing in <!--#exec cmd=...-->" on Linux (fwd) 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 09 Feb 1997 00:20:39 MST."
             <Pine.BSF.3.95.970209000836.3343U-100000@alive.ampr.ab.ca>
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 1997 01:54:40 -0700
From: Howard Fear <hsf@pooh.pageplus.com>
Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com


> On Sat, 8 Feb 1997, Howard Fear wrote:
>> On the output side, rputc (and bputc) should be buffering
>> anyway.  And that didn't change either.  Both are actually
>> pretty straightforward.  I believe that the patches submitted
>> just created another (local) level of buffering which will
>> be done much more cleanly by 2.0's I/O streams.

Marc Slemko writes:
> ...and that extra buffer makes large files transfer more than twice as
> quickly than without it.  bputc buffers stuff in 4k buffers, but there is
> still a lot of overhead when using rputc.  There are two function calls
> for every call to rputc which could be causing part of that.  

Don't disagree.  I just suspect a design issue when faced with
buffering data to call another routine which buffers data.
But, then I believe that you've already pointed this out.  
So, by all means do it for 1.2 and re-evaluate when we
get 2.0's streams.

--
Howard Fear      I'm just a country perl hacker Jim.        hsf@pageplus.com
                    http://www.pageplus.com/~hsf/           hsf@redcape.com