21 Dec
2005
21 Dec
'05
9:53 p.m.
Joseph Galbraith wrote:
Phillip Susi wrote:
We know this. If you read back through the previous mails, you'll see
that disabling the algorithm was suggested for testing purposes only.
Ge van Geldorp wrote:
If an app is going to send one byte at a time, disabling
the nagle algorithm is _exactly_ the _wrong_ thing to do!
The nagle algorithm exists precisely so that applications can
send one byte at a time and not have sucky performance.
I'm not arguing that delayed ACK is
incorrect, but 2.5 sec???
Searching the
Internet, 200ms seems a much more accepted value. This is also the value
used by the MS stack:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/itsolutions/network/deploy/depovg/tcpip2k.m
spx (under "Delayed Acknowledgements").
That does sound like a more reasonable value, but if nagling is
disabled, it should not matter.
But any app that does:
send();
send();
.
.
.
send();
recv();
Should not disable the nagel algorithm except in rare (I can't
think of any) circumstances.
I can give you a few (besides debugging) :
- Streaming media
- X servers
- network games
If packet timing is more important that consuming large amounts of
bandwidth with packet overhead, it's perfectly reasonable to disable it.
Ged.