Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: SO_SNDBUF size is small on win32?

From: "Rocco Altier" <RoccoA(at)Routescape(dot)com>
To: "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>,"Yoshiyuki Asaba" <y-asaba(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SO_SNDBUF size is small on win32?
Date: 2006-06-27 15:50:59
Message-ID: 6E0907A94904D94B99D7F387E08C4F57013CF516@FALCON.INSIGHT (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org 
> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of 
> Martijn van Oosterhout
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 12:23:13AM +0900, Yoshiyuki Asaba wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I see a performance issue on win32. This problem is causes by the
> > following URL. 
> > 
> > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/823764/EN-US/
> > 
> > On win32, default SO_SNDBUF value is 8192 bytes. And 
> libpq's buffer is
> > 8192 too.
> 
> Ok, so there's a difficiency in Windows TCP code. Do you have any
> benchmarks to show this actually makes a difference. According to the
> URL you give, the problem occurs if the libpq buffer is *bigger* than
> the socket buffer, which it isn't...
> 
The article also says there is a problem if they are the same size.

	-rocco

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Martijn van OosterhoutDate: 2006-06-27 16:13:18
Subject: Re: SO_SNDBUF size is small on win32?
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2006-06-27 15:45:53
Subject: Re: SO_SNDBUF size is small on win32?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group