Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 05:27:38 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@village.org> Cc: dillon@apollo.backplane.com, dg@root.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD performing worse than Linux? Message-ID: <3C31B94A.15BDD42F@mindspring.com> References: <200201010043.g010h0i36281@apollo.backplane.com> <20011231221601.A54679@nexus.root.com> <200201010636.g016aLC37133@apollo.backplane.com> <20020101.023054.77323162.imp@village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"M. Warner Losh" wrote: > In message: <200201010636.g016aLC37133@apollo.backplane.com> > Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> writes: > : I think that has been fixed. Try it. It doesn't lag for me. The > : turn-around echo of the keystroke should be pushed out instantly. > > Yes. Keep in mind that you only need to enable this when you have > unacked data. Otherwise, NODELAY doesn't buy you anything. > > I routinely go over non-NODELAY links and haven't seen a huge problem > except when modems were involved that liked to freak out. My experience agrees with David's. It makes sense to set TCP_NODELAY on the client, still, if the payload is still small enough after encryption. On the server side, it makes less sense. The server side TCP_NODELAY is the problem in this case, since it is the client, not the server, which is on the slow side of a USB dongle, FWIW. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C31B94A.15BDD42F>