On Wed, 2019-12-18 at 11:15 -0800, Ryan Schmitt wrote: > > > > My original intention with lowMark was to allow individual data > > producers to produce capacity updates before their respective > > capacity > > window hits zero and the data stream stalls. I am open to newer > > ideas > > or better solutions. > > > > The concept makes perfect sense, the implementation is just kinda... > cattywampus. For one thing, I think that `lowMark` is being set > according > to the wrong settings (remote, instead of local). For another, I > think that > the input connection window should be expanded to Integer.MAX_VALUE > early > on (i.e. during settings negotiation), instead of waiting for the > window to > fall below `lowMark` for the first time while consuming DATA frames. > Finally, it appears that `lowMark` is being used for both streams and > the > connection window, and I think these should be separated: the > `lowMark` for > streams should be defined in terms of `SETTINGS_INITIAL_WINDOW_SIZE`, > and > the low mark for the overall connection window should just be > hardcoded to > 10MiB or whatever. >
No idea what cattywampus but whatever it is, I am open to a better implementation if proposed. Cheers Oleg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
