Wireshark mailing list archives
Re: dumpcap performance?
From: Jeff Morriss <jeff.morriss.ws () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 16:39:14 -0500
Anders Broman wrote:
Hi, Would something like this be more efficient?
Basically you're proposing building one bigger buffer for writing rather than doing several smaller writes?
My experience would say no: memcpy()s should be avoided whenever possible. Admittedly my experience does not include a lot of file I/O but I would think/hope the OS would do a good job of buffering smaller writes into larger I/Os.
Another way to solve the many-small-writes problem (if it is a problem) would be to use writev().
___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe
Current thread:
- dumpcap performance? Anders Broman (Feb 22)
- Re: dumpcap performance? Jeff Morriss (Feb 22)
- Re: dumpcap performance? Guy Harris (Feb 22)
- Re: dumpcap performance? Jeff Morriss (Feb 22)