The weird thing is that the lsof command shows that connections are made 
between 2 solr instances and not from the origin of new income data ...

--

/Yago Riveiro

On 4 Mar 2017 10:32 +0000, Mikhail Khludnev <[email protected]>, wrote:
> I hardly can comment regarding PHP. But if you call curl as an external
> program it.s a dead end. However, giving
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/972925/persistent-keepalive-http-with-the-php-curl-library
> you can reuse a 'context' across curl library calls and make sure that's
> keep-alive pool is large enough for your app (which btw, rarely true for
> java.net.URL, where it's just 5 connections). Happy pooling!
>
> 04 марта 2017 г. 12:25 пользователь "Yago Riveiro" <[email protected]
> написал:
>
> > Hi Mikhail,
> >
> > I’m not using SSL, and the way I call Solr is through a php script that
> > use Curl
> >
> > --
> >
> > /Yago Riveiro
> >
> > On 4 Mar 2017 08:54 +0000, Mikhail Khludnev <[email protected]>, wrote:
> > > Hello, Yago.
> > > It usually happens when client doesn't reuse http connections. How do you
> > > call Solr? Is there SSL?
> > >
> > > 04 марта 2017 г. 3:33 пользователь "Yago Riveiro" <
> > [email protected]
> > > написал:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > I have this log in my dmesg: possible SYN flooding on port 8983.
> > Sending
> > > > cookies.
> > > >
> > > > The Solr instance (6.3.0) has not accepting more http connections.
> > > >
> > > > I ran this: _lsof -nPi |grep \:8983 | wc -l_ and the number of
> > connection
> > > > to
> > > > port 8983 is about 14K in CLOSE_WAIT ou ESTABLISHED state.
> > > >
> > > > Any suggestion of what could be the reason?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > /Yago
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----
> > > > Best regards
> > > >
> > > > /Yago
> > > > --
> > > > View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.
> > > > nabble.com/Solr-6-3-0-possible-SYN-flooding-on-port-
> > 8983-Sending-cookies-
> > > > tp4323341.html
> > > > Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> > > >
> >

Reply via email to