From owner-freebsd-current  Wed Jun 24 04:47:33 1998
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA14192
          for freebsd-current-outgoing; Wed, 24 Jun 1998 04:47:33 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.15.68.22])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id EAA14157
          for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Wed, 24 Jun 1998 04:47:17 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from bde@godzilla.zeta.org.au)
Received: (from bde@localhost)
	by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.8.7/8.8.7) id VAA09913;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 21:47:14 +1000
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 21:47:14 +1000
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199806241147.VAA09913@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: bde@zeta.org.au, syssgm@dtir.qld.gov.au
Subject: Re: PIPE_BUF?
Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

>How much would it hurt performance or whatever in the normal case (ie
>don't care about atomicity because there's just 1 sender and 1 receiver)
>to raise this to at least a page (4Kb).  After all, years ago the limit

Anyone how wants to change it should quantify the costs and benefits :-).
I guess they are both too small to make any practical difference.

Bruce

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message