httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: [PATCH] lingering_close performance improvement
Date Mon, 10 Feb 1997 13:00:58 GMT
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> 
> The ONLY reason we are seeing this problem now, and not
> before, is because keep-alive clients behave differently than non-keep-alive
> clients.  The FIN_WAIT_2 timeout is necessary because it will cause an
> Apache 1.1.3 server (with full keep-alive enabled, including Mozilla/2)
> to reboot just as quickly as an Apache 1.2b6 server.  We fixed the other
> problems with lingering_close after 1.2b4, and we can reduce the overhead
> even more with my performance patch, but we can't do a damn thing about
> the client keeping a connection alive when the server-side has closed.
> 
I seem to recall that there were many(?) cases where if people recompiled
with NO_LINGCLOSE the FIN_WAIT_2 problem "went away"... Now this may
have been fixed with the latest rev to l_c(), but maybe not. In any
case, no other changes were done; just using l_c() or not. I seem
to recall that HotWired servers were hit in this way... Does the
latest version of l_c() remove the problem? If so, then that's cool
(although there still seems to be some disagreement on whether
l_c() is even needed according to the 1.1 specs) but if not then
we can't blame it on keepalive clients.

-- 
====================================================================
      Jim Jagielski            |       jaguNET Access Services
     jim@jaguNET.com           |       http://www.jaguNET.com/
                  "Not the Craw... the CRAW!"

Mime
View raw message