Evgeny Kotkov <evgeny.kotkov_at_visualsvn.com> writes:
> Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> writes:
>> "local network" is a rather blurry concept.
>> This will often return FALSE for local wireless connections, for
>> example, because of shared medium contention.
>> I agree that 5msec is a well chosen latency threshold.
>> But why not name this function after the question it answers,
>> e.g. svn_ra_serf__is_low_latency_connection()?
> My original intention here was to have a function that can distinguish
> between LAN and WAN, using the information that we have — that's
> latency now and possibly something else in the future. But indeed,
> considering local wireless connections, the name of the function could
> be misleading.
> Something like svn_ra_serf__is_low_latency_connection() would probably
> be more appropriate right now. And, we could deal with the additional
> information about the connection to base the detection on, if and when
> we have that.
> I'll try to update the function name and the related comments.
Committed in https://svn.apache.org/r1803989
Received on 2017-08-03 14:32:08 CEST