[Info-vax] Re; Spiralog, RMS Journaling (was Re: FREESPADRIFT)

[VAXman- at SendSpamHere.ORG]

In article <nkbpti$i3$1 at news.albasani.net>, Jan-Erik Soderholm <jan-erik.soderholm at telia.com> writes:
>Den 2016-06-21 kl. 18:18, skrev VAXman- at SendSpamHere.ORG:
>> In article <nkbn1q$5cn$2 at Iltempo.Update.UU.SE>, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> writes:
>>> On 2016-06-19 04:35, David Froble wrote:
>>>> Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Yes, but that is a simple calculation with 1 block = 512 bytes.
>>>>> It does not correctly display partially filled blocks. I guess
>>>>> that what most here are talking about is the size up to the
>>>>> marker. Convering the used/allocated number of blocks is simple.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jan-Erik.
>>>>
>>>> I would suggest "what does it matter?"
>>>>
>>>> It's not like some other file is going to use the unused portion of some
>>>> disk block, or, as suggested, unused part of 4096 bytes ....
>>>
>>> No. But if you implement FTP, or a web server, or any number of other
>>> tools/programs, they are expected to report file sizes in bytes, and the
>>> byte count should be *accurate*. Even one byte off is not acceptable.
>>
>
>A web server probably always has to calculate the number of bytes
>sent to get it right. There is many ways that the sent data can be
>different then the on-file data and the web page can be "dynamic".
>
>> Why?
>
>In HTTP you can end up with connections staying open and
>waiting for that final byte that never comes.

Exactly!  And you answered the 'Why?' prior to the quoted first instance.

-- 
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker    VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG

I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.