On 16/02/2017 11:43 a.m., Alex Rousskov wrote:
> On 01/22/2017 12:52 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>> - a config line should have roughly this generic structure:
>>1) directive (first label, which determines the syntax)
>>2) parameters (mandatory values, fixed positions for each one)
>>3)
On 01/22/2017 12:52 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> - a config line should have roughly this generic structure:
>1) directive (first label, which determines the syntax)
>2) parameters (mandatory values, fixed positions for each one)
>3) options (values that may be absent, using key[=value]
On 02/16/2017 04:35 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> Strictly speaking anything on the line - including the directive name is
> a parameter.
To minimize bickering, I will do my best to just focus on [what I
perceive as] important disagreements and ignore everything else,
including [what I perceive as]
On 01/30/2017 04:43 PM, Eduard Bagdasaryan wrote:
> Thanks for the detailed review. I tried to address all other remarks,
> renamed parameters according to the suggested terminology,
> merged with latest v5 r15027 and re-attached the patch.
Amos, did Eduard address your concerns? Any other
On 22.01.2017 22:52, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> as I understood it the existing delay pools design is that multiple
> pools can apply to traffic. In which case on each write() attempt the
> bucket with smallest available amount determins the write size and all
> buckets have the actually consumed
On 23/01/2017 12:10 a.m., Eduard Bagdasaryan wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This patch introduces a new "response_delay_pools" feature. I have
> posted it(with detailed description) recently to the thread for
> preliminary review with "preview" flag. This patch conforms to latest
> v5 (r15011) and also has
Hello,
This patch introduces a new "response_delay_pools" feature. I have
posted it(with detailed description) recently to the thread for
preliminary review with "preview" flag. This patch conforms to latest
v5 (r15011) and also has some problems fixed:
* MessageBucket::theAggregate pointer
