On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Jesper Derehag <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I know the issue with relayd reconnects have been discussed earlier here:
> http://lists.lttng.org/pipermail/lttng-dev/2014-October/023650.html
>
> But has there been any further development on this?
> I would actually go as far as calling it a bug and submitting it to redmine 
> tracker, but want to get approval here first.
>

Hi Jesper,

There has been no work done on this yet.

> I would argue that its *always* a good idea to do reconnects due to that you 
> really dont have any end-to-end control of the TCP flow.
> Some random router might decide to spuriously drop your connection, not to 
> mention more modern queuing disciplines which might randomly throw away 
> packets.
>
> On automated systems, that would mean that you have to somehow automagically 
> detect that you got a disconnect, and then externally restart the session, 
> which seems like a very weird workaround...
>
> I would be happy to file such a issue to the tracker if people thinks its a 
> good idea, (and depending on if I have the time I *might* look into solving 
> it myself).
> But it might be some time away in that case..

Sure, feel free to open a ticket. We'll definitively have to look into
recovering gracefully at some point.

Jérémie

>
> Regards,
> Jesper
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lttng-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev



-- 
Jérémie Galarneau
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

_______________________________________________
lttng-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev

Reply via email to