On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 03:17:59PM -0800, Sadasiva Gujjarlapudi wrote:
> After applying the patch and socket wasn't `close`d in Lua code
> request/sec 7898.0976
> $time haproxy
>  real 0m6.689s
>  user 0m1.043s
>  sys 0m1.059s
> After applying the patch and socket was `close`d in Lua code
> requests/sec: 9617.4609
> $time haproxy
>  real 0m7.505s
>  user 0m0.738s
>  sys 0m0.930s
> Same machine, no Lua code running
> requests/sec: 14468.4468
> $time haproxy
> real 0m17.265s
> user 0m0.243s
> sys 0m0.670s
> Also tested by causing the runtime error in Lua code before `close`ing
> the socket.
> $ulimit -n
>  6000
> Lua action/app created 20K connections during the test and everything
> seems to be working as expected.

Excellent, this is very encouraging.

> My only concern with this patch is what if there is a persistent
> connection and `conn_count` is always greater than zero and that
> triggers GC.

It should not be a problem because the "lua" struct is per-Lua instance,
hence per-stream, so we shouldn't have that many connections per stream
and they'll be GC'd once the Lua instance or the stream is terminated.
And if someone runs a self-contained Lua application creating that many
sockets and never closing them, the current situation doesn't help

What I propose if you agree is that I'll merge the patch into 2.2 next
week. This will give us quite some time to observe if it requires more
adjustments. And then you can pick it and apply it to your local tree
in order to save some resources.


Reply via email to