On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 02:30:17PM +0200, Wouter Wijngaards via Unbound-users wrote: > > You should probably increase that count to 100 or better 1000. > incoming-num-tcp: 1000 > And perhaps also increase the upstream (outgoing-num-tcp) if you have > upstream TCP or TLS configured. >
Thanks for the input, if you specifically mean "tcp-upstream" and "tls-upstream" then both of them are the default "no". > This allocates more buffers and that is useful for a server with more > clients on it. I will increase incoming-num-tcp and see how it turns out. It just felt wrong to increase the value without reaching out to the list since the statistics were showing several threads having 0 clients, at least giving me the impression that there should be plenty of connection slots available. > > When TCP is nearly full it should use an even shorter timeout. And not > allow such very long idle connections. That looks like it went wrong. > Yeah I noticed the time limiting code in setup_tcp_handler(). I was wondering about the wording in the man page for "tcp-idle-timeout" that states "The period Unbound will wait for a query on a TCP connection", which could suggest that the timeout is only looked at for an initial query, and a bit unclear on what happens if you open a connection, do a query, and then hold on to the connection. -- Patrik Lundin
