Micah Cowan wrote:
> Do you mean, if he implemented buffering, would disabling it be useful?
> I would think so. I could imagine scenarios where one would wish to tail
> -f data as it came in. Or there's your explanation above of someone not
> wanting to lose extra data because it had been buffered. But I'm
> guessing what you really wanted to know was whether the feature as a
> whole had a specific problem to address.
If you write into the file as it comes, the OS will be saving to disk in
whatever
way it wants to (multiples of disk pages). I don't think there's too
much benefit
on buffering to pages in wget (a few extra syscalls are not a problem
for wget).
