It looks to me like it's used in conjunction with sendfile on Linux, and is probably useful for preventing slow starts on big bursts of data (like a response). I suspect it is especially useful when each header in the hdtr->headers iovec is not going to fill a full packet. (Is this thing anything other than the opposite of TCP_NODELAY?)
It is one of those things that only helps if you have it and doesn't hurt if you don't.
-aaron
On Friday, December 13, 2002, at 09:11 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This concept is not portable at all as far as I know, so why do we expose
it in our API? My understanding of TCP_NOPUSH is that it is how linux
implements sendfile. If that is the case, then it should be removed from
our public API, and we should just use it behind the scenes.
If that isn't the case, then can somebody please explain how an
application that uses APR_TCP_NOPUSH is at all portable? Once that flag
is used, the application will behave differently on many platforms.
I would like to remove that macro later this weekend, so please let me know if that will be an issue.
