httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: do we still want sendfile enabled with our default conf files?
Date Fri, 18 Mar 2005 00:01:49 GMT
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 07:27:54 -0800, Justin Erenkrantz
<justin@erenkrantz.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 02:12:50PM +0000, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 08:47:08AM -0500, Joshua Slive wrote:
> > > +1, as before.
> > >
> > > From the users' perspective, sendfile results in unexplained corruption
> > > or uninterpretable error messages pretty much any time a network
> > > filesystem is used to host content (and random other times on win32).
> >
> > Judging by my inbox over the last year, similar behaviour on Linux with
> > IPv6 is becoming more and more prevalant, as adoption ramps up. So
> > a default of off would be a very great help there too.
> 
> These seem like broken OSes and not a suitable justification to disable
> sendfile.  We should fix the code - perhaps by teaching APR not to enable the
> sendfile-variants on these buggy platforms - not disable it entirely.  For
> those platforms that don't have bugs, disabling sendfile would be a ridiculous
> performance hit.  -1.  -- justin

Is that "-1" a vote, or a veto against the idea?  If the latter,
please explain in at least a little detail how a technical solution
can be implemented that will avoid some of the types of problems
triggered by the use of sendfile.  After a year or two that these
issues have been known, the only thing that anybody truly knows how to
do is to disable sendfile.

Mime
View raw message