RE: [PATCH RFC net-next 2/2] tcp: Add Redundant Data Bundling (RDB)

From	David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	RE: [PATCH RFC net-next 2/2] tcp: Add Redundant Data Bundling (RDB)
Date	2015-11-02 10:20 +0100
Message-ID	<qqjrs-3wz-25@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<qmRBn-4gB-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <qnXY7-55x-35@gated-at.bofh.it> <qnXY8-55x-39@gated-at.bofh.it> <qp4kO-6fZ-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

From: Bendik Rønning Opstad
> Sent: 29 October 2015 22:54
...
> > > > The semantics of the tp->nonagle bits are already a bit complex. My
> > > > sense is that having a setsockopt of TCP_RDB transparently modify the
> > > > nagle behavior is going to add more extra complexity and unanticipated
> > > > behavior than is warranted given the slight possible gain in
> > > > convenience to the app writer. What about a model where the
> > > > application user just needs to remember to call
> > > > setsockopt(TCP_NODELAY) if they want the TCP_RDB behavior to be
> > > > sensible? I see your nice tests at
> > > >
> > > >   https://github.com/bendikro/packetdrill/commit/9916b6c53e33dd04329d29b
> > > >   7d8baf703b2c2ac1b> >
> > > > are already doing that. And my sense is that likewise most
> > > > well-engineered "thin stream" apps will already be using
> > > > setsockopt(TCP_NODELAY). Is that workable?
> 
> This is definitely workable. I agree that it may not be an ideal solution to
> have TCP_RDB disable Nagle, however, it would be useful with a way to easily
> enable RDB and disable Nagle.

If enabling RDB disables Nagle, then what happens when you turn RDB back off?

	David

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Thread

[PATCH RFC net-next 2/2] tcp: Add Redundant Data Bundling (RDB) "Bendik Rønning Opstad" <bro.devel@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 23:00 +0200
  Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 2/2] tcp: Add Redundant Data Bundling (RDB) Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@google.com> - 2015-10-26 16:00 +0100
    Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 2/2] tcp: Add Redundant Data Bundling (RDB) Andreas Petlund <apetlund@simula.no> - 2015-10-26 23:00 +0100
      Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 2/2] tcp: Add Redundant Data Bundling (RDB) Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@google.com> - 2015-10-26 23:00 +0100
        Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 2/2] tcp: Add Redundant Data Bundling (RDB) Jonas Markussen <jonassm@ifi.uio.no> - 2015-10-27 20:20 +0100
        Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 2/2] tcp: Add Redundant Data Bundling (RDB) "Bendik Rønning Opstad" <bro.devel@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 00:00 +0100
          RE: [PATCH RFC net-next 2/2] tcp: Add Redundant Data Bundling (RDB) David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM> - 2015-11-02 10:20 +0100
  RE: [PATCH RFC net-next 2/2] tcp: Add Redundant Data Bundling (RDB) David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM> - 2015-11-02 10:40 +0100
    Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 2/2] tcp: Add Redundant Data Bundling (RDB) Bendik Rønning Opstad <bro.devel@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 03:10 +0100

csiph-web