Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-new-httpd-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 30158 invoked by uid 500); 7 Jan 2001 20:00:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list new-httpd@apache.org Received: (qmail 30147 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2001 20:00:19 -0000 Message-ID: <008f01c078e3$f5c34ba0$011aa8c0@godzilla> From: "David Reid" To: References: Subject: Re: simple HTTP/1.0 request strace Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 19:56:36 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-Spam-Rating: h31.sny.collab.net 1.6.2 0/1000/N > the {get,set}sockopt stuff is TCP_NODELAY and CORK. those aren't terribly > expensive system calls at all... but it's still tempting to clean them up. > i'd say that since all sockopt calls go through APR it can keep track > of the current state -- it could even defer setting TCP_NODELAY until > a naked write comes along (i.e. a write which isn't part of a sendfile > sequence which uses CORK). There is a note along those lines in the the code for os_cork()... Are you on the APR list as we should discuss how to implement it there really ;) Nice to see you're back! david