gustavo @ http://niemeyer.net On Aug 6, 2014 3:03 PM, "roger peppe" <roger.pe...@canonical.com> wrote: > > On 6 August 2014 13:57, Gustavo Niemeyer <gust...@niemeyer.net> wrote: > > Why would any application well designed open thousands of ports individually > > rather than a range? Sounds like an unreasonable use case. > > I don't know.
Ok. So let's please move on. I don't see the complexity of listing a few things (even if it is a thousand) and removing them. It's certainly much better than removing a thousand ports individually. > > I also don't get your point about concurrency. You don't seem to have > > addressed the point I brought up that opening or closing ports concurrently > > today already presents undefined behavior. > > The result is undefined for a unit (a port open can fail if another > one already has > the port open) Again, let's not argue anymore then. There's no real problem being created or solved either way.
-- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
