httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rici Lake <r...@ricilake.net>
Subject Re: AP_MODE_EATCRLF considered indigestible
Date Fri, 15 Apr 2005 16:36:15 GMT

On 15-Apr-05, at 10:56 AM, Greg Ames wrote:

> the reason that this and the corresponding 1.3 BUFF logic exists is to 
> minimize "tinygrams" - ip packets that are less than a full mtu size.  
> tinygrams definately degrade network performance and trigger things 
> like Nagle's algorithm.  in this particular case we are trying to 
> combine response data from two or more different pipelined requests 
> into a single packet.

Yes, I understood that. My question was (a) whether an HTTP response is 
every tiny enough to truly qualify as a tinygram, and (b) whether the 
work done to avoid sending them is worth the cost of not avoiding them.

Clearly, some HTTP responses are less than the MSS for some 
connections. But they are hardly one-byte packets. It would certainly 
be possible to simply set NODELAY on the socket to disable Nagle, and 
it's not obvious to me that there would be a huge degradation of 
network throughput resulting from this.

Still, if it truly is an issue, there has got to be a better way to 
accomplish it.


Mime
View raw message