> > When we use this approach we have a significant over-read > for small > > files. If we for example were to write an application that > moves over > > a directory with 100 files, each being 20 bytes, we would perform > > terribly slow and waste a lot of bandwidth. > > One approach could be to use a slow-start that only queues a > few over-reads at the start, then increases the window > exponentially to a maximum of 4 MB as data is read. This > shouldn't penalize the small file case much while (hopefully) > allowing large file transfers to happen reasonably quickly.
AFAIK this is what OpenSSH does, it starts with few packets and then starts to fill the bandwidth. Amazing improvements on perf! Br, -- You have to step outside the box to see it. Disclaimer: This message and any attachments thereto are intended solely for the addressed recipient(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail (including any attachments thereto) without producing, distributing or retaining any copies thereof. Any review, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. Thank you. _______________________________________________ libssh2-devel http://cool.haxx.se/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libssh2-devel
