svn commit: samba r3944 - in branches/SAMBA_3_0/source: lib smbd

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Thu, 2004-11-25 at 11:12 +0200, Toomas Soome wrote:
> Volker Lendecke wrote:
> > How much does sendfile gain us at all? I've had to debug really nasty problems,
> > I scratched my head why samba simply stops responding, making XP reconnect.
> > sendfile = no was the very simple answer after hours of staring at sniffs,
> > trying to reproduce the errors. If we don't see a huge performance improvement
> > I'd VERY strongly argue that we dump sendfile completely. It is just way too
> > buggy in common kernels.
> 
> linux is not the only os around.

That's actually the argument against sendfile().  If it were not used on
Linux, then it has better chance of being broken by Linux-bound
developers.  (Unfortunately it does happen, even with the build farm).

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett <abartlet at samba.org>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20041125/5e68621f/attachment.bin