From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cassarossa.samfundet.no (cassarossa.samfundet.no [IPv6:2001:67c:29f4::29]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9276021F4FC for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2015 09:18:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pannekake.samfundet.no ([2001:67c:29f4::50] ident=unknown) by cassarossa.samfundet.no with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Z4tYt-0000tU-9d for bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net; Tue, 16 Jun 2015 18:18:07 +0200 Received: from sesse by pannekake.samfundet.no with local (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1Z4tYt-0000v0-4D for bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net; Tue, 16 Jun 2015 18:18:07 +0200 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 18:18:07 +0200 From: "Steinar H. Gunderson" To: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net Message-ID: <20150616161807.GA31289@sesse.net> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: Linux 4.0.4 on a x86_64 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Subject: Re: [Bloat] using tcp_notsent_lowat in various apps? X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 16:18:41 -0000 On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 09:11:08AM -0700, Dave Taht wrote: > I just tossed off a quick patch for rsync, not that I have a clue as > to whether it would make any difference there. For bulk applications (like rsync), how would this make sense at all? I thought the entire point of this option was if you knew what data to send now, but that you might want to change your mind later if it takes some time to send it. The latter doesn't apply to rsync. /* Steinar */ -- Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/