Re: Is sendfile all that sexy?

From: Sasi Peter (sape@iq.rulez.org)
Date: Thu Jan 25 2001 - 05:58:03 EST

Next message: Matthias Andree: "Re: Linux 2.2.16 through 2.2.18preX TCP hang bug triggered by rsync"
Previous message: V Ganesh: "Re: inode->i_dirty_buffers redundant ?"
In reply to: Anton Blanchard: "Re: Is sendfile all that sexy?"
Next in thread: Anton Blanchard: "Re: Is sendfile all that sexy?"
Reply: Anton Blanchard: "Re: Is sendfile all that sexy?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Thu, 25 Jan 2001, Anton Blanchard wrote:

> I have patches for samba to do sendfile. Making a tux module does not make
> sense to me, especially since we are nowhere near the limits of samba in
> userspace. Once userspace samba can run no faster, then we should think
> about other options.

Do you have it at a URL?

-- SaPE - Peter, Sasi - mailto:sape@sch.hu - http://sape.iq.rulez.org/

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Matthias Andree: "Re: Linux 2.2.16 through 2.2.18preX TCP hang bug triggered by rsync"
Previous message: V Ganesh: "Re: inode->i_dirty_buffers redundant ?"
In reply to: Anton Blanchard: "Re: Is sendfile all that sexy?"
Next in thread: Anton Blanchard: "Re: Is sendfile all that sexy?"
Reply: Anton Blanchard: "Re: Is sendfile all that sexy?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 31 2001 - 21:00:21 EST