[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-4343?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15239989#comment-15239989
 ] 

Thomas Jackson commented on TS-4343:
------------------------------------

If I'm not mistaken a client cannot close *just* the write end of the socket. 
In this half-open case the client has initiated a teardown. So, IMO in this 
case we can send any bytes we have in memory-- but if we still have an 
outstanding connection to the origin there is no reason to leave that origin 
connection running, as once we get bytes from the origin we'll have nowhere to 
send it to. 

I also did some more testing, and it seems that this case I'm describing is 
only on requests with no body if the origin hasn't started sending a body 
back-- seems just like an oversight in the SM. (the specific issue is I send a 
GET, sever doesn't send bytes, client DCs, connection to origin completes and 
is logged as a successful request).

So, from that I think it should just mimic the behavior of what the POSTs are 
doing-- namely that we stop the downstream connection, send whatever bytes we 
have, then close the client connection as well.

Sound fair?

> When ATS hits `proxy.config.http.origin_max_connections`, the requests queued 
> will not abort even if client aborts
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: TS-4343
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-4343
>             Project: Traffic Server
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Thomas Jackson
>            Assignee: Thomas Jackson
>
> While testing my patch for TS-4341 I've noticed that once a request is queued 
> waiting for max connections, ATS will not abort the request even if the 
> client has completely disconnected. It seems that ATS is only setting up a 
> consumer of the UA tunnel if there is a post body-- and as such we never see 
> the socket close on us. Still digging into this some, but this seems like a 
> problem ;)



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to