search for: baus

...ults. For example, the two following queries return the same results: familynames|firstnames:andre familynames|firstnames:andr Another example, the first query returns a correct result + incoherent results, the second query returns only the correct result: (familynames|firstnames:baus) (familynames|firstnames:baus*) Could you help me please? Thank you Johan

Klaas Jan Wierenga wrote: > Hi Henri and others, > > Very interesting post about TCP_CORK. I would be very interested in having > it applied in the next version of Icecast. I'd be more interested in some figures to show there being a benefit, most examples talk about HTTP servers with short lived connections where sendfile(2) is used. > For low-bitrate streams the problem

> > p.s. For an in depth analysis of TCP_CORK read Christiopher Baus' excelent > article: http://www.baus.net/on-tcp_cork Thanks for this pointer. I'd been meaning to reply on this thread, but hadn't got around to it, primarily because I didn't really understand TCP_CORK (the linux manpage is, as usual, fairly unclear on what exactly it does). No...

We're abusing icecast in a true narrowcasting setup (personalized stream per mountpoint). The streams itself are created in a piece of proprietory (spelling?, i'm dutch) software, icecast merely relays them. However, the intended endpoint is an embedded device. This device has trouble with tcp/ip packets not matching the max. packet size (MSS or MSS minus header). After eleborate testing,

...e numbers of listeners, not only because of the > TCP overhead but also the fact that it reduces the write syscall > overhead. Will TCP_CORK (linux) and TCP_NOPUSH (BSD) give noticable > benefits wrt icecast? It might prove helpful if available but more info > is needed. As Christopher Baus points out in his article http://www.baus.net/on-tcp_cork it is not so much the overhead of a few write calls that affects performance, but the overhead in sending more smaller packets. In my case sending small packets resulted in a lot of interrupts (one or two for each packet sent) for many liste...

...only because of the >>TCP overhead but also the fact that it reduces the write syscall >>overhead. Will TCP_CORK (linux) and TCP_NOPUSH (BSD) give noticable >>benefits wrt icecast? It might prove helpful if available but more info >>is needed. > > > As Christopher Baus points out in his article > http://www.baus.net/on-tcp_cork it is not so much the overhead of a few > write calls that affects performance, but the overhead in sending more > smaller packets. In my case sending small packets resulted in a lot of > interrupts (one or two for each packet...

...I understand correctly your TCP_CORK solution would apply to all formats since it is applied on the client socket (irrespective of the format). I would be very interested in having this patch and seeing it applied to Icecast. Cheers, KJ p.s. For an in depth analysis of TCP_CORK read Christiopher Baus' excelent article: http://www.baus.net/on-tcp_cork -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: icecast-bounces@xiph.org [mailto:icecast-bounces@xiph.org]Namens Henri Zikken Verzonden: zondag 25 december 2005 15:05 Aan: icecast@xiph.org Onderwerp: [Icecast] Use of TCP_CORK instead of TCP_NODELAY We...

...lto:mlrsmith@gmail.com]Namens Michael Smith Verzonden: woensdag 28 december 2005 17:14 Aan: Klaas Jan Wierenga CC: henri.zikken@deltasolutions.nl; icecast@xiph.org Onderwerp: Re: [Icecast] Use of TCP_CORK instead of TCP_NODELAY > > p.s. For an in depth analysis of TCP_CORK read Christiopher Baus' excelent > article: http://www.baus.net/on-tcp_cork Thanks for this pointer. I'd been meaning to reply on this thread, but hadn't got around to it, primarily because I didn't really understand TCP_CORK (the linux manpage is, as usual, fairly unclear on what exactly it does). No...