On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Jason Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > Would increasing the limit from 16 to something bigger make this more > easy? 16 was selected arbitrarily by me.
IIRC, the original problem was too much memory usage, wasn't it? Perhaps instead of a fixed array, the solution is a list and a running sum of the length of the strings in it. This seems like something people could usefully tune, and means that in the future you could even talk about a feature like "don't worry about the memory used by connections until the total is over 4gigs." -- ----------------------- | Henry Finucane | (510) 473-7148 -----------------------
