On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 07:01:49PM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote: > Is that "-1" a vote, or a veto against the idea? If the latter, > please explain in at least a little detail how a technical solution > can be implemented that will avoid some of the types of problems > triggered by the use of sendfile. After a year or two that these > issues have been known, the only thing that anybody truly knows how to > do is to disable sendfile.
A solution that disables sendfile for OSes that do not have these sendfile issues (say *BSD and Solaris) are going to get my veto. If we need to do some platform/run-time detection to identify those platforms that we know may be buggy, then we add those in. This is the first time I can recall a thread that says sendfile is broken. Perhaps there's been threads and I just don't remember them. *shrug* It's bad behavior on our part to turn off features because one or two OSes have problems. The proper course of action should be to identify those OSes, and, if possible, the circumstances that cause the brokenness and have our code act accordingly. In fact, I bet all of the run-time checks *could* be placed inside of APR's apr_socket_sendfile(). -- justin
