[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: TCP wait_for transmit question

On 14 Jul 2012, at 17:10, Anil Madhavapeddy wrote:

> Interesting; so this check is also clamped to the TX MSS
> (Tcp.Pcb.write_available) and not to the max_size of the application
> buffer.
> This is probably a good time to nail down the semantics of all these
> different modules, particularly as vchan/shmem will be coming along
> shortly.
> Channel: buffered I/O, manual flush required
> Flow: unbuffered I/O, will be triggered immediately
> Tcp.Pcb: buffered if delay writes are used, unbuffered with nodelay
> The TCP Nagle's buffer is necessary since only it knows if there are TX
> packets in flight, whereas the Channel module doesnt...

naive question- what's the relationship between Tcp.Pcb and Flow then?  ie., if 
i have a tcp connection underneath with nagling turned on, is my flow genuinely 
unbuffered, or just mostly so?



This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may 
contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, 
please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.   Please do not use, copy 
or disclose the information contained in this message or in any attachment.  
Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily 
reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system:
you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.