Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
> Remy Maucherat wrote:
>> mturk@apache.org wrote:
>>> Author: mturk
>>> Date: Fri Sep 29 01:23:37 2006
>>> New Revision: 451157
>>>
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=451157
>>> Log:
>>> Introduce keepAliveTimeout to be able to separate
>>> the Keep-Alive and Socket timeout.
>>> The patch enables to have infinite socket timeouts
>>> while still having correct keep alive.
>>
>> As I said before, I see no point in that.
> maybe I'm being dumb here, so please enlighten me, but how are they
> (keepalivetimeout vs connection timeout) different on a HTTP connection?
>
> wouldn't the smallest of these two values always close the connection?
> connection timeout on HTTP is after all only measured when the worker
> thread is not using the connection. on java.io, it would be on a read()
> from the input stream, and on APR and NIO it would be time spent in the
> poller or a read()
From what I understand, keepAliveTimeout is supposed to be the timeout
when doing HTTP keepalive (= keepalive between requests) while the other
one is supposed to be the timeout while processing requests (= time
spent blocking on a read when processing a PUT or POST). Since there's
already the disableUploadTimeout flag (which inflates the timeout while
requests are being processed), I could not find any actual benefit with
this change.
Rémy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
|