Yes, we did such modification in our test environment and it is working
well so far.
Moreover, it showed good results in case of intermixed requests with low
and high priority are handled.
BR/ Yury
2013/7/5 Valentin V. Bartenev <vb...@nginx.com>
> On Wednesday 26 June 2013 12:34:17 Yury Kirpichev wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Thanks for analysis and explanation.
> > Then how about the following workaround -
> > - queue blocked frames at the begining of queue in FIFO order.
> > (just remove from ngx_http_spdy_queue_blocked_frame the code:
> > if (frame->priority >= (*out)->priority) {
> > break;
> > }
> > )
> >
> > - queue non-blocked frames after blocked in priority order:
> > static ngx_inline void
> > ngx_http_spdy_queue_frame(ngx_http_spdy_connection_t *sc,
> > ngx_http_spdy_out_frame_t *frame)
> > {
> > ngx_http_spdy_out_frame_t **out;
> >
> > for (out = &sc->last_out; *out *&& !(*out)->blocked*; out =
> > &(*out)->next)
> > {
> > if (frame->priority >= (*out)->priority) {
> > break;
> > }
> > }
> >
> > frame->next = *out;
> > *out = frame;
> > }
> >
> > Do you foresee any obvious drawback of such approach?
> >
> [..]
>
> At first glance I don't. Indeed it can be a better strategy, particularly
> since the SYN_STREAM frames are usually small.
>
> Have you tested it already?
>
> wbr, Valentin V. Bartenev
>
> _______________________________________________
> nginx-devel mailing list
> nginx-devel@nginx.org
> http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx-devel
>
_______________________________________________
nginx-devel mailing list
nginx-devel@nginx.org
http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx-devel
