[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: tramp (2.1.16-pre); Re: test for tramp-chunksize "does not work"

From: David Abrahams
Subject: Re: tramp (2.1.16-pre); Re: test for tramp-chunksize "does not work"
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 17:15:58 -0400

On Apr 23, 2009, at 3:29 PM, Michael Albinus wrote:

David Abrahams <address@hidden> writes:

           (accept-process-output proc 1))
           (accept-process-output proc 0))

made it complete, saying:

Bytes sent: 50  Bytes received: 50
Bytes sent: 100 Bytes received: 100
Bytes sent: 150 Bytes received: 150
Bytes sent: 200 Bytes received: 200
Bytes sent: 250 Bytes received: 250
Bytes sent: 300 Bytes received: 300
You should set `tramp-chunksize' to a maximum of 300

I don't believe we shall set the timeout to 0. It doesn't let too much
bytes through, because just one chunk of accept-process-output can be
read in 0 seconds.

Yeah, I did a few experiments and .01 seemed to give the same performance on my Mac, while generating much shorter traces ;-).

In my case (Ubuntu 9.04), with the timeout of 1 second, I get

 "You should set `tramp-chunksize' to a maximum of 6750"

When I set the timeout to 0 seconds, I get

 "You should set `tramp-chunksize' to a maximum of 250"


The second statement would be wrong for me. Therefore, I believe we
shall keep the test as it is, knowing that there are serious problems on
MacOS these days, which are not because of Tramp.

So the question for me is, since I have added the attached advice to accept-process-output, should I also adjust tramp-chunksize to whatever the test tells me?

Attachment: tramp-setup.el
Description: Binary data

David Abrahams
BoostPro Computing

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]