Re: [PATCH] cache_peer standby=N

On 29/04/2014 8:46 a.m., Alex Rousskov wrote:
> On 04/27/2014 10:02 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>
>> We should state the problem with idles clearly (yes it is difficult to
>> word),
>
> We already do that:
>
>> + max-conn limit works poorly when there is a relatively
>> + large number of idle persistent connections with the
>> + peer because the limiting code does not know that
>> + Squid can often reuse some of those idle connections.
>

Oh thats what that was about.

> Do you want us to add "This poor idle connection management is a
> problem." sentence to the above?

That would make it worse IMO.

What about:
"
max-conn works poorly with persistent connections and may prevent a peer
being selected when there are idle connections because the limiting code
does not know whether Squid can reuse some of those idle connections.
"

>
>> or we fix that problem (see below) and update the documentation
>
> The change is not trivial, so I do not think we should be forced to do
> that as a part of this project. There are many problems with idle
> connections, and we are not making them worse by adding the standby
> pools, quite the opposite. It feels like we are being penalized for
> improving documentation of ancient problems.
>

If you want to do it as a followup fine. I just do not see a particular
need to delay fixing a bug with a (now) known solution.

Amos
Received on Tue Apr 29 2014 - 11:48:35 MDT