On Sep 29, 2006, at 11:18 AM, Mladen Turk wrote:
Hi,
The problem is that we presume that socket timeout
is keep-alive timeout, and that is wrong.
The reason is simple because the time between two
requests has noting to do with the the time the data
will be read.
FWIW, httpd separates the 2
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
I like the trick, it's smart, but I believe we could also achieve it
with keep alive request limits, ie, when thread count gets high, turn
off keep alive by mocking maxKeepAliveRequests="1"
ie, this way it doesn't affect the servlet and its usage of the stream.
I like the trick, it's smart, but I believe we could also achieve it
with keep alive request limits, ie, when thread count gets high, turn
off keep alive by mocking maxKeepAliveRequests="1"
ie, this way it doesn't affect the servlet and its usage of the stream.
Filip
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Ml
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
semi useless, LOL :)
"when the number of threads gets lower, it tends to use fewer threads"
Ok, it's the opposite: "when the number of threads gets higher, it will
try using fewer threads". Looking at the code will makes this obvious.
Look. My patc
Mladen Turk wrote:
semi useless, LOL :)
"when the number of threads gets lower, it tends to use fewer threads"
Ok, it's the opposite: "when the number of threads gets higher, it will
try using fewer threads". Looking at the code will makes this obvious.
I was talking about the soTimeout.
Ac
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
you are correct, soTimeout should not, imho, change depending on the
thread count.
if the user sets 20 seconds for soTimeout then it should stay that way.
Right. With the current code you can only deduct what the actual
Mladen Turk wrote:
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
you are correct, soTimeout should not, imho, change depending on the
thread count.
if the user sets 20 seconds for soTimeout then it should stay that way.
Right. With the current code you can only deduct what the actual
timeout will be. Like
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
you are correct, soTimeout should not, imho, change depending on the
thread count.
if the user sets 20 seconds for soTimeout then it should stay that way.
Right. With the current code you can only deduct what the actual
timeout will be. Like said, for 40 sec tim
you are correct, soTimeout should not, imho, change depending on the
thread count.
if the user sets 20 seconds for soTimeout then it should stay that way.
on blocking io, soTimeout naturally becomes keepAliveTimeout, as when
the request is complete, you go into read() again.
on non blocking io
