https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65832
--- Comment #4 from Eric Covener <[email protected]> --- > This sounds (to me) like a more robust alternative, good/bad/off-topic idea? I think it's a good idea. But I wonder if still we wouldn't want the preventive aspect, otherwise we encourage stuff to be delayed in the pending_q which might be tricky for debugging/observability. Maybe preventive can be done without actively flushing idle keepalive connections, for example with a low but non-zero supply of idlers considered in connections_above_limit() to avoid adding fuel to the fire. But i am also not excited about driving more flipping of disable_listensockets -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
