couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andy Wenk <a...@nms.de>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] 1.6.0 proposals
Date Fri, 28 Mar 2014 14:18:28 GMT
Dave great summary - thanks. I am +1 on recutting from master


On 28 March 2014 15:08, Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:

> Thanks for summarising this from IRC Dave. Model ASF behaviour. :)
>
> I am +1 for re-cutting from master, unless there's some specific
> technical reason not to do so.
>
> On 28 March 2014 14:52, Garren Smith <garren@apache.org> wrote:
> > I can't comment on what to do w.r.t the socket issue. But I'm +1 for
> cutting a new branch for 1.6
> >
> >
> > On 28 Mar 2014, at 3:39 PM, Dave Cottlehuber <dch@jsonified.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi folks,
> >>
> >> In this week's IRC meeting we discussed what's up with 1.6.0. While the
> decision
> >> rests with the Release Manager djc@ it's worth discussing.
> >>
> >> # Blockers
> >>
> >> We have 1 blocker, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1986and the
> >> fix is simply setting the tcp receive buffer size to 32786, or 4x the
> previous
> >> value.
> >>
> >> Exactly why this is a now a problem and wasn't before is not clear, but
> in
> >> a couple of weeks of fiddling we've not come up with a better solution,
> and
> >> nobody's found other issues as a result of it.
> >>
> >> In the meeting we put forward 3 options for how to include this fix in
> the
> >> source:
> >>
> >> 1. uncomment the equivalent line in default.ini
> >>
> >>       socket_options = [{recbuf, 262144}, {sndbuf, 262144}, {nodelay,
> true}]
> >>
> >> 2. update the default value directly in /src/mochiweb/internal.hrl
> >>
> >>       -define(RECBUF_SIZE, 8192 * 4).
> >>
> >> 3. change the specific setting only for the replication tests
> >>
> >> This boils down to "have people been seeing this in the real world?"
> and the
> >> answer is yes, with pretty severe impact.
> >>
> >> Please pick one!
> >>
> >> # Patch 1.6.x branch or update to current master
> >>
> >> Personally I'm undecided on this, master has 180 further commits , esp
> >> Fauxton, and also a few other important ones. These could be cherry
> picked
> >> but is there any reason not to cut a new 1.6.x off current master
> instead?
> >> I've no real view of the actual work involved BTW, so please educate me.
> >>
> >> https://github.com/apache/couchdb/compare/1.6.x...master
> >>
> >> Comments?
> >>
> >> --
> >> Dave Cottlehuber
> >> Sent from my PDP11
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Noah Slater
> https://twitter.com/nslater
>



-- 
Andy Wenk
Hamburg - Germany
RockIt!

http://www.couchdb-buch.de
http://www.pg-praxisbuch.de

GPG fingerprint: C044 8322 9E12 1483 4FEC 9452 B65D 6BE3 9ED3 9588

https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/andywenk.asc

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message