Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C Programming > Is there a payoff for using Large File API?

Reply
Thread Tools

Is there a payoff for using Large File API?

 
 
Alona
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-17-2008
Hello All,

Is there a payoff for using Large File API? Why, for example, wouldn't
one use xxx64() functions in all cases rather than considering either
to use 32-bit or 64-bit API.

Thank you, Alona
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Ian Collins
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-17-2008
Alona wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> Is there a payoff for using Large File API? Why, for example, wouldn't
> one use xxx64() functions in all cases rather than considering either
> to use 32-bit or 64-bit API.
>

You should ask this on a group dedicated to the platform where these
function are used. They are not part of standard C, so any answer will
be platform specific.

--
Ian Collins.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
jacob navia
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-17-2008
Alona wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> Is there a payoff for using Large File API? Why, for example, wouldn't
> one use xxx64() functions in all cases rather than considering either
> to use 32-bit or 64-bit API.
>
> Thank you, Alona



Look, just think a bit.
1) You are going to access the disk. This unit is incredibly SLOW
compared to RAM/CPU speeds.

2) In a 32 machine, using 64 bit data could be slightly more costly
than using 32 bit data.

3) Any slow down produced by that 64 bit usage will be millions
of times smaller than the time needed to access the disk!

Conclusion:

It doesn't matter at all. Use always the 64 bit functions and
do not worry about this.


--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32
 
Reply With Quote
 
Flash Gordon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-17-2008
Alona wrote, On 17/03/08 20:01:
> Hello All,
>
> Is there a payoff for using Large File API? Why, for example, wouldn't
> one use xxx64() functions in all cases rather than considering either
> to use 32-bit or 64-bit API.


One problem with using the xxx64() functions is that they are not
standard and so are not portable across all implementations. As to other
possible disadvantages, you need to ask in a group that covers the
implementation(s) you are interested in.
--
Flash Gordon
 
Reply With Quote
 
santosh
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-17-2008
Flash Gordon wrote:

> Alona wrote, On 17/03/08 20:01:
>> Hello All,
>>
>> Is there a payoff for using Large File API? Why, for example,
>> wouldn't one use xxx64() functions in all cases rather than
>> considering either to use 32-bit or 64-bit API.

>
> One problem with using the xxx64() functions is that they are not
> standard and so are not portable across all implementations.


They are standardised under SUSv3, but they won't be available unless
the underlying system supports large files. So the restriction in
portability is due both to the fact that they are not covered by ISO C
and also the fact that not all systems define them in the first place.

<snip>

 
Reply With Quote
 
Eric Sosman
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-18-2008
jacob navia wrote:
> Alona wrote:
>> Hello All,
>>
>> Is there a payoff for using Large File API? Why, for example, wouldn't
>> one use xxx64() functions in all cases rather than considering either
>> to use 32-bit or 64-bit API.

> [...]
> It doesn't matter at all. Use always the 64 bit functions and
> do not worry about this.


... but be sure not to use gets64(), because it's four
billion times more dangerous than gets(), which is already
too dangerous. You should also avoid fflush64(stdin64),
because its behavior is not standardized and it will do
different things on different systems. Oh, and remember
to cast all your FILE* pointers to FILE64* pointers to
avoid compiler warnings. (See the <stdio62.h64> header
for macros and definitions to make the transition easier.)

--
Eric Sosman
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)lid
 
Reply With Quote
 
jacob navia
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-18-2008
Eric Sosman wrote:
> jacob navia wrote:
>> Alona wrote:
>>> Hello All,
>>>
>>> Is there a payoff for using Large File API? Why, for example, wouldn't
>>> one use xxx64() functions in all cases rather than considering either
>>> to use 32-bit or 64-bit API.

>> [...]
>> It doesn't matter at all. Use always the 64 bit functions and
>> do not worry about this.

>
> ... but be sure not to use gets64(), because it's four
> billion times more dangerous than gets(), which is already
> too dangerous. You should also avoid fflush64(stdin64),
> because its behavior is not standardized and it will do
> different things on different systems. Oh, and remember
> to cast all your FILE* pointers to FILE64* pointers to
> avoid compiler warnings. (See the <stdio62.h64> header
> for macros and definitions to make the transition easier.)
>



Incredible how much nonsense you can write. You do this for
free or at least you are getting paid for it?

Obviously writing nonsense as "answer" to my posts should
improve your ranking in the clique isn't it?

Great Eric!

Go on. It is you that looks like an idiot, not me.

--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32
 
Reply With Quote
 
santosh
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-18-2008
jacob navia wrote:

> Eric Sosman wrote:
>> jacob navia wrote:
>>> Alona wrote:
>>>> Hello All,
>>>>
>>>> Is there a payoff for using Large File API? Why, for example,
>>>> wouldn't one use xxx64() functions in all cases rather than
>>>> considering either to use 32-bit or 64-bit API.
>>> [...]
>>> It doesn't matter at all. Use always the 64 bit functions and
>>> do not worry about this.

>>
>> ... but be sure not to use gets64(), because it's four
>> billion times more dangerous than gets(), which is already
>> too dangerous. You should also avoid fflush64(stdin64),
>> because its behavior is not standardized and it will do
>> different things on different systems. Oh, and remember
>> to cast all your FILE* pointers to FILE64* pointers to
>> avoid compiler warnings. (See the <stdio62.h64> header
>> for macros and definitions to make the transition easier.)
>>

>
>
> Incredible how much nonsense you can write. You do this for
> free or at least you are getting paid for it?
>
> Obviously writing nonsense as "answer" to my posts should
> improve your ranking in the clique isn't it?
>
> Great Eric!
>
> Go on. It is you that looks like an idiot, not me.


I thought his post was funny. It's obviously meant to be nonsense, well
obvious to most I guess.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard Heathfield
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-18-2008
jacob navia said:

> Eric Sosman wrote:


<snip>
>>
>> ... but be sure not to use gets64(), because it's four
>> billion times more dangerous than gets(), which is already
>> too dangerous. You should also avoid fflush64(stdin64),


[etc]
>
> Incredible how much nonsense you can write.


*Whoosh*!

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
 
Reply With Quote
 
George Peter Staplin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-19-2008
jacob navia wrote:
> Alona wrote:
>> Hello All,
>>
>> Is there a payoff for using Large File API? Why, for example, wouldn't
>> one use xxx64() functions in all cases rather than considering either
>> to use 32-bit or 64-bit API.
>>
>> Thank you, Alona

>
>
> Look, just think a bit.
> 1) You are going to access the disk. This unit is incredibly SLOW
> compared to RAM/CPU speeds.
>
> 2) In a 32 machine, using 64 bit data could be slightly more costly
> than using 32 bit data.
>
> 3) Any slow down produced by that 64 bit usage will be millions
> of times smaller than the time needed to access the disk!
>
> Conclusion:
>
> It doesn't matter at all. Use always the 64 bit functions and
> do not worry about this.



That's not the answer. See the followup I posted in
comp.unix.programmer. Some systems support 64-bit syscalls, and
structs with their file API, without the need for special 64 suffixed
functions. The programmer generally shouldn't care, as long as the
necessary macros are defined.


George
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
median of large data set (from large file) friend.05@gmail.com Perl Misc 5 04-02-2009 04:06 AM
Warner Goes Blu-Ray Exclusive, biggest payoff yet caliman.john@gmail.com DVD Video 213 02-07-2008 12:30 AM
[Urgent] Is there a size limit on returning a large dataset or a large typed array from web service? Ketchup ASP .Net Web Services 1 05-25-2004 10:11 AM
REVIEW: "Privacy Payoff", Ann Cavoukian/Tyler J. Hamilton Rob Slade, doting grandpa of Ryan and Trevor Computer Security 0 02-23-2004 04:23 PM
Backing Up Large Files..Or A Large Amount Of Files Scott D. Weber For Unuathorized Thoughts Inc. Computer Support 1 09-19-2003 07:28 PM



Advertisments