Giampaolo Rodola' <g.rod...@gmail.com> added the comment:
> The question seems to be is if it should be okay to _GiveUpOnFastCopy after a > partial (incomplete) copy has already occurred via sendfile. I think it should not. For posterity: my rationale for introducing _USE_CP_SENDFILE was to allow monkey patching for corner cases such as this one (see also bpo-36610 / GH-13675), but expose it as a private name because I expected them to be rare and likely up to a broken underlying implementation, as it appears this is the case. FWIW, I deem _USE_CP_SENDFILE usage in production code as legitimate, and as such it should stay private but never be removed. ---------- versions: +Python 3.9 _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue43743> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
