One more change for v3 I think

[Alister Winfield]

I assume responsive includes not producing errors or null-responses (bad memory of testing a web service for performance and not spotting it had started to produce 50x replies at an wonderful rate). Okay I understand how hard this is to include in the re-use metric but always worth thinking about if its possible.

Alister


On 24 Feb 2015, at 18:21, Alan DeKok <aland at deployingradius.com> wrote:

> On Feb 24, 2015, at 12:54 PM, Matthew Newton <mcn4 at leicester.ac.uk> wrote:
>> That makes sense - and the FB link is an interesting read. Not
>> something I'd normally think about with link aggregation!
> 
>  Exactly.
> 
>> So essentially when things start to get busy, a connection may
>> fail quicky, meaning it goes back into the pool and is then picked
>> up again rather than other entries that have been hanging around
>> idle for a while.
> 
>  If a connection fails, it’s closed.  The issue is connections which *almost* work.  They take a long time to do things… which slows everything else down.
> 
>  The connection pool should prioritize *responsive* connections.
> 
>  Alan DeKok.
> 
> 
> -
> List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/devel.html

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.freeradius.org/pipermail/freeradius-devel/attachments/20150225/5dba9f5a/attachment.sig>