Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > gnu.bash.bug > #16236

Re: Proposed new feature for bash: unbuffered pipes

Show all headers | View raw

On April 22, 2020 6:32:07 PM worley@alum.mit.edu (Dale R. Worley) wrote:

> The crux of the problem, IMHO, is to look at it from the right angle:
>
> Occasionally, the user desires that I/O through certain pipes should be
> unbuffered, that is, the stdio stream(s) that write into the pipe should
> be unbuffered, rather than the default block-buffered.  These are
> situations where the user can tell that it is desirable to sacrifice
> efficiency to gain low latency, whereas the writer of the program that
> the user is running could not predict the needs of this particular
> invocation.  (This is where Ulrich Drepper was incorrect; the writer of
> the program doesn't know when this is desirable.)
>
> This facility is best activated by a feature in bash, as the need arises
> from the relationship between two processes.
>
> The ideal way to implement this would be for the kernel to provide two
> flavors of pipe, one designated buffered and one designated unbuffered,
> and according to the user's instructions, bash would allocate an
> unbuffered pipe when it was needed.  The kernel itself would treat the
> two types of pipe in the same way, but stdio would create buffered
> streams for fd's that were opened on buffered pipes and it would create
> unbuffered streams for fd's that were opened on unbuffered pipes.
>
> However, getting a coordinated change into the kernel seems like it
> would be quite difficult.
>
> So an alternative implementation is to have a way for bash to notify
> processes it creates that certain pipes (identified by their dev/ino
> numbers) should have streams that are unbuffered.  Pretty much the only
> way to do this is to have a conventional environment variable for
> communicating this information.
>
> Of course, either of these solutions requires changes to glibc, but
> then, if you're going to modify buffering behavior of streams, you are
> going to have to modify glibc.

Given the current political realities in the relevant FOSS ecosystem, it 
might be easier to add a new pipe flavor or attribute to the kernel and 
then get libc implementations to support it as a fait accompli than to do 
something purely in libc. Also, an environment variable is semantically 
wrong: its scope is too  broad, well beyond the specific pipe you care 
about. Imagine the variable leaking into a daemon that lives forever.

Back to gnu.bash.bug | Previous | Next | Find similar

Thread

Re: Proposed new feature for bash:  unbuffered pipes Daniel Colascione <dancol@dancol.org> - 2020-04-23 17:26 -0700

csiph-web