Hi Oleg, > 1. Why, exactly in the same load conditions, a pool with 600 connections is > more than enough for the blocking client and not enough for the async one? >
I cannot answer this question unless I can analyze and re-run the benchmark used to load test both clients. --> ok, I'll retest it. > 2. Regarding the 'ConnectionRequestTimeout', you told me that the reason was > probably due to lock contention. Is this lock contention provoked by this > timeout of only 1ms? Do you always recommend a higher value as Stefan said > previously? > What is the point of having such a low request timeout? What is it exactly you intent to achieve by making requests fail if the pool manager fails to lease a connection after 1 ms? --> Our software is a proxy. We have some clients with a prerequirement to not permitt requests that take more than, for example, 10ms. So if for getting one connection from the pool we have to wait 10ms, then the prerequirement cannot be accomplished. So that's why, in certain installations, we don't allow to wait this time, we simply prefer to fail and return an error to the client like "Maximum number of simultaneous connections exceded". --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: httpclient-users-unsubscr...@hc.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: httpclient-users-h...@hc.apache.org
