Maxim Dounin Wrote:
---
> Hello!
>
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 05:16:18PM -0500, atarob wrote:
>
> > Maxim Dounin Wrote:
> > ---
> > > Hello!
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 02:58:05PM -0500
Hello!
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 05:16:18PM -0500, atarob wrote:
> Maxim Dounin Wrote:
> ---
> > Hello!
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 02:58:05PM -0500, atarob wrote:
> >
> > > The config listen option rcvbuf which maps to the TCP SO_RCVBUF, is
Maxim Dounin Wrote:
---
> Hello!
>
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 02:58:05PM -0500, atarob wrote:
>
> > The config listen option rcvbuf which maps to the TCP SO_RCVBUF, is
> applied
> > to the listening socket, and not inherited by the accept()ed
> c
Hello!
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 02:58:05PM -0500, atarob wrote:
> The config listen option rcvbuf which maps to the TCP SO_RCVBUF, is applied
> to the listening socket, and not inherited by the accept()ed connections. So
> if you have a high load application where the legitimate request is bound t
The config listen option rcvbuf which maps to the TCP SO_RCVBUF, is applied
to the listening socket, and not inherited by the accept()ed connections. So
if you have a high load application where the legitimate request is bound to
be no more than 4K, for instance, you could save a lot of RAM by drop
