Brian Havard wrote:
>
> On Mon, 5 Mar 2001 13:42:00 -0500 (EST), Cliff Woolley wrote:
> >
> >AHA! No wonder I couldn't reproduce the problem on Linux. =-) I take it
> >that the >64k bogosity is now completely fixed?
>
> Well, yes & no. Yes that large writev's will no longer die on OS/2. No in
> that it should never have had to handle them, there are other bugs to be
> found. Requesting a 20MB shtml file chews 20MB of server memory, serious
> badness. Am I the only one seeing this or is it easily reproducable?
>
Paul Reder posted a patch to mod_include to take care of a problem that
sounds like this. Ryan committed it not too long ago. Do you see this
behavior with the latest and greatest mod_include?
Greg
