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 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
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
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-06-27 16:13:18 | Re: SO_SNDBUF size is small on win32? |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2006-06-27 15:45:53 | Re: SO_SNDBUF size is small on win32? |