{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/nodejs/node/issues/4302","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/nodejs/node/issues/4302/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/nodejs/node/issues/4302/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/nodejs/node/issues/4302/events","html_url":"https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/4302","id":122421559,"number":4302,"title":"rfc: Wouldn't UDP be able to benefit from a sendv() function?","user":{"login":"ronkorving","id":631240,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/631240?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/ronkorving","html_url":"https://github.com/ronkorving","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ronkorving/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ronkorving/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ronkorving/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ronkorving/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ronkorving/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ronkorving/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ronkorving/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ronkorving/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ronkorving/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/nodejs/node/labels/dgram","name":"dgram","color":"fbca04"},{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/nodejs/node/labels/feature%20request","name":"feature request","color":"0D7BDE"}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":16,"created_at":"2015-12-16T03:46:06Z","updated_at":"2015-12-17T17:31:44Z","closed_at":null,"body":"Right now if you want to send multiple buffers, you have to concatenate them before calling send(). It seems however that libuv is perfectly fine with receiving a bunch of buffers. I can imagine that in particular use cases, this could speed up message delivery tremendously. Would love to hear thoughts on this."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/nodejs/node/issues/comments/165522511","html_url":"https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/4302#issuecomment-165522511","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/nodejs/node/issues/4302","id":165522511,"user":{"login":"indutny","id":238531,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/238531?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/indutny","html_url":"https://github.com/indutny","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/indutny/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/indutny/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/indutny/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/indutny/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/indutny/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/indutny/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/indutny/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/indutny/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/indutny/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-12-17T17:31:44Z","updated_at":"2015-12-17T17:31:44Z","body":"Another idea of somewhat bigger complexity (this is downside): is to change the way the Buffers are concatenated. Instead of allocating a single storage immediately, we could just create some kind of JointBuffer, and allocate real Buffer lazily, when someone tries to access its data.\r\n\r\nWhen someone will try to send this kind of JointBuffer via `socket.send()` - UDP code will be clever about it, and will avoid actually concatenating it."}}