On Sun, Sep 02, 2001 at 12:38:02PM -0700, Scott G. Miller wrote: < > > > That's patching the syndrome, not the problem. Chances are that even if > > your requests get through locally, you won't see a reply. > Why not? Do we expect another limit to be hit elsewhere?
Yes, several. When a message is received it is put on the Ticker heap, which uses blockingRun so won't run until threads are cleared up. The even when that get's off, the reply (which could be on a new connection) may not get back in, and the reply also goes via the Ticker heap. The things to do about this problem are: - Balance the setting for connection limit and the limit to the number of threads better (you should need 3-4 times as many threads as live incoming connections, plus those you wish to use for FCP and other) - you should hit the incoming connection limit before the threadlimit. - Set down the connectionTimeout value so idle connections are cleared off sooner. - Add better/more aggressive pruning of idle connections when the connection limit approaches. - Debug my code to check that there isn't some issue keeping old connections from being used so that new threads are created unnecessarily. -- 'DeCSS would be fine. Where is it?' 'Here,' Montag touched his head. 'Ah,' Granger smiled and nodded. Oskar Sandberg oskar at freenetproject.org _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
