At 07:05 PM 1/13/2004, Brad Nicholes wrote: > I don't think so because the "split into multiple bucket" code was >only enabled if both large_file and send_file was enabled. Which meant >that on a non-large_file build the check for ENABLE_SENDFILE_OFF wasn't >there anyway. If they have large_file support and don't have send_file >(ie. NetWare), then the file must be split into multiple buckets or it >doesn't work (32/64 bit type mismatches in the file size). If they have >large_file support and send_file, then everything is as it was before.
What about the case where they did have sendfile, but did not use large file support? [Did/Do] we attempt to test the EnableSendfile logic? If not, perhaps we should. There are other cases, e.g. some NFS volume strategies, where a raw kernel sendfile turns out to be fatal on some platforms. >I'm not sure why a check for ENABLE_SENDFILE_OFF is here anyway. This >code doesn't really have anything to do with whether or not sendfile is >used. All it does is split a large file into multiple smaller buckets. >If later down the line sendfile is used to actually send the file from >multiple buckets, great. If not, that is fine also (as demonstrated by >the fact that NetWare doesn't have sendfile() and it all works fine). Not arguing that breaking up huge responses is a bad thing :) However I'm somewhat confused why apr doesn't handle this gracefully. Bill
