From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,7e490a18b9688bd9
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.68.58.162 with SMTP id s2mr1999142pbq.20.1316193612589;
        Fri, 16 Sep 2011 10:20:12 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 m9ni7639pbd.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Stream_Element_Array
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 18:20:09 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <m2sjnwe75i.fsf@pushface.org>
References: 
 <edfcce02-7d80-4186-a281-c8a4983a3efd@p25g2000pri.googlegroups.com>
	<cedfbdf9-5ca7-4159-a4fc-d7b6331d1395@p37g2000prp.googlegroups.com>
	<1e6rw4vto3ldb.i8d7fxixapx4.dlg@40tude.net>
	<m239fz4cpy.fsf@pushface.org>
	<b7yqos9wk4fn.15kuyzgqrkhge.dlg@40tude.net>
	<ae7ed905-c866-45a8-acbd-0e0eebc29f83@x29g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
	<28u4e86fk8gn$.ialexttobgr0$.dlg@40tude.net>
	<276b8d0a-5b3c-4559-a275-98620657cc2f@s30g2000pri.googlegroups.com>
	<ju5wgjs11mug$.4ohgki30bvpf.dlg@40tude.net>
	<01c12338-e9f8-49ab-863d-c8282be3875e@g31g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
	<1esmml9qftomp.vihelaijmcar$.dlg@40tude.net>
	<02671fc7-5c38-42dc-8017-529f6dead8fd@j19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
	<m2aaa5ftvs.fsf@pushface.org>
	<631f3859-8118-4f4c-a684-152ee5f589bf@o15g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>
	<m262ktfpp0.fsf@pushface.org>
	<a833dae4-4d84-4155-93c1-1ce17585114e@a12g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>
	<1ha21cmm4ub0x.1x5tkefenjm53$.dlg@40tude.net>
	<m2wrd8eqjj.fsf@pushface.org>
	<1agiqouo0byd0$.12u30ddt25czu$.dlg@40tude.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="dFCm8HWntFqmDIilBLqEJQ";
	logging-data="32699"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19Q8UkqjVUodou+Wi2lLVpMiZEO1gKa2pY="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (darwin)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mS/8rf4yjJSHNgCiA+uxFAIqjn4=
	sha1:jd2Tx+D0qsOL4HDkEqZEOBX0t+0=
Xref: news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:17991
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: 2011-09-16T18:20:09+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:

> On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 11:21:20 +0100, Simon Wright wrote:
>
>> "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
>> 
>>> As an example, consider TCP/IP. If you wanted to make TCP_NO_DELAY
>>> option working, you would have to respect packet boundaries. I.e. the
>>> right way to handle stream protocols is to use Write (S, Packet)
>>> instead.
>> 
>> Even more so with UDP!
>
> Yes, but I hope that nobody would come to an idea to abstract UPD as a
> stream of octets, because UDP is unreliable and does not ensure ordering.
> (Many device designers we are working with have a strange love to UDP. It
> is an ongoing fight to convince them that replacing UDP with TCP/IP would
> make life much easier both for us and for them.)

I haven't checked recently; no, the bug I posted is still there,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9535

I certainly wouldn't expect any significant performance difference
between UDP and TCP with no-delay. I suppose what's significant for you
may not be for me. But very few system engineers IME appreciate the
difference; and by the time you've eliminated out-of-order UDP packets
you may have eaten the difference anyway.