httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Eric Covener <cove...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1605369 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/mod_proxy_wstunnel.c
Date Wed, 25 Jun 2014 17:01:35 GMT
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Takashi Sato <takashi@tks.st> wrote:
> 2014-06-25 21:33 GMT+09:00 Eric Covener <covener@gmail.com>:
>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 8:24 AM,  <takashi@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Refactor asynchronous mod_proxy_wstunnel using pollfd returned by MPM.
>>> r1601943 and r1605307 made Event MPM return woken pollfd, so async
>>> wstunnel doesn't need its own apr_pollset_poll.
>>
>> If both sockets are readable, we'll go all the way through
>> ap_mpm_register_socket_callback_timeout + locking queues and getting
>> dispatched to a new thread to read the 2nd socket.
>
> So, you think the new code is poor performance than before?
> Or are you afraid that the 1st and 2nd socket are proceed at the same time?
> The latter doesn't happen, because event.c line 1968:
>
>                 /* We only signal once per N sockets with this baton */
>                 if (!(baton->signaled)) {
>
> so only the 1st socket is sent to worker thread.

I think hopping off that thread during a flurry of websockets activity
could hurt but I can't say for sure.
>
>> I think this also prevents us from doing ProxyWebsocketAsyncDelay to
>> stay on the thread because we no longer have a poll during the
>> callback invocation.
>
> Yes, you are right, but, is ProxyWebsocketAsyncDelay needed?

I don't know. It was more or less free at the time, and I was more
anticipating what knobs might be useful.

>From the context of the diff -- maybe if it's non-zero (non default),
we could use the old path directly.



-- 
Eric Covener
covener@gmail.com

Mime
View raw message