bug#71355: 30.0.50; [PATCH] Improve performance of buffered output in Eshell

[Stefan Kangas]

Jim Porter <jporterbugs@gmail.com> writes:

> This is consistent with what I saw, but I thought it best to err on the
> side of smallness for the buffer size, just to ensure that we flush the
> buffer faster than the redisplay rate (defaulting to 40Hz), even on
> slower machines. Since the difference between 2048 and 4096 is small, I
> figured it wasn't too high a price to pay.

Makes sense to me, thanks.