Re: Bloat? (khttpd)

[Martin Dalecki]

Lincoln Dale wrote:
> 
> At 19:33 23/12/99 -0500, Mark Hahn wrote:
> >so far, we have no reason to believe that khttpd performs better than,
> >say, phhttbd, even on silly static-only benchmarks.  and even if it did,
> >the sensible conclusion would be that there's something wrong with Linux,
> >not that webserving should be in the kernel!
> 
> actually, khttpd does get around one limitation currently inherent inside
> linux --
> and that is that there is no mechanism for zero-copy.

Wrong. There is the sendfile syscall.

--
	Marcin Dalecki