Dossy wrote: > > On 2001.07.21, Mike Hoegeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I was doing the above but it's a bit heavy handed don't you think? > > considering the data in question is usually less than 500 bytes. > > If ns_tmpnam is generating a filename in /tmp, and your /tmp is > a mount in tmpfs and you have plenty of RAM, then going from > socket to file in tmp is actually quite fast -- I bet even some > platforms could do a readv() straight from socket fd to filesystem > fd without entering into userspace, or do some other kind of > mmap'ing deal. > > Of course, now sucking the file back from the fs in /tmp into > your userspace application might suck, but again, if it's in > tmpfs, it'll be way fast. if you are doing something like SOAP or xml-rpc handling it seems to me to be common sense to not funnel everything through temp files. it's a tiresome and (somewhat) inefficient process. i should need to to wonder how ineffecient it is or is'nt going to be on a particular platform when it's such a no-brainer to implement the needed functionality. the C function is almost a simple as the tcl hack. there's a 'ns_conn query' proc. there should be a 'ns_conn content' proc also 'course you could argue that the whole soap handling process should be in a C module and you should do something like ns_soap registerproxy /soap ns_soap registermethod /soap $soap_xmlnamespace $soap_xmlmethod tcl_methodimplementation so the argument is relative i suppose.. -mike
