On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 12:20 PM Tomas Vondra <[email protected]> wrote: > * In fact, does it improve the smart shutdown case in practice? Let's > say we have a single instance, and we're restarting it. It'll send > GoAway to all the clients, the good clients will try to reconnect. But > if there's even a single "bad" client ignoring the GoAway, all the > well-behaved clients will get stuck. Ofc, that can happen without the > GoAway message too - a client may disconnect because of timeout etc. But > it makes it more likely, and it'll affect the well-behaved clients. > > * Would it make sense to have some payload in the GoAway message? I'm > thinking about (a) some deadline by which the client should disconnect, > e.g. time of planned restart / shutdown, (b) priority, expressing how > much the client should try to disconnect (and maybe take more drastic > actions).
I'd been wondering about these as well, but in the context of the tangential thread [1]. HTTP has much stronger semantics for its GOAWAY frames, for instance. --Jacob [1] https://postgr.es/m/CAOYmi%2BmSn8xQ7ExqY07V6G2oFXN2nY%2B7f4yf_RV2%3D7xNCKwW-Q%40mail.gmail.com
