On Sunday 20 June 2004 02:35 pm, you wrote: = = :I this how things are supposed to be, or will mmap() become more = :efficient eventually? Thanks! = : = : -mi
= It's hard to say. mmap() could certainly be made more efficient, e.g. = by faulting in more pages at a time to reduce the actual fault rate. = But it's fairly difficult to beat a read copy into a small buffer. Well, that's the thing -- by mmap-ing the whole file at once (and by madvise-ing with MADV_SEQUENTIONAL), I thought, I told, the kernel everything it needed to know to make the best decision. Why can't page-faulting code do a better job using all this knowledge, than the poor read, which only knows about the partial read in question? I find it so disappointing, that it can, probably, be considered a bug. I'll try this code on Linux and Solaris. If mmap is better there (as it really ought to be), we have a problem, IMHO. Thanks! -mi _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"