[remote protocol] support for disabling packet acknowledgement

Daniel Jacobowitz drow@false.org
Thu Jul 10 19:08:00 GMT 2008

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 02:44:20PM -0400, Paul Koning wrote:
> For one thing, if you want to work on performance, there are much more
> dramatic changes to the protocol that could be done that would help
> much more.  I can't believe that the cost of acks is significant
> compared to all the other bottlenecks.

In addition to what Sandra said, the ack is generally in a separate
TCP packet from the next response or request.  That means there's
double the number of TCP packets.  Especially over high latency links,
I think this will be a big help.  I've had plenty of experience of
cross-country remote protocol sessions and I like anything that helps.

Daniel Jacobowitz

More information about the Gdb mailing list