On 3/31/23 11:00 PM, Thomas Munro wrote:

I mention this now because I'm not sure whether to consider this an
'open item' for 16, or merely an enhancement for 17.  I guess the
former, because someone might call that a new denial of service
vector.  On the other hand, if you fill up the listen queue for socket
1 with enough vigour, you're also denying service to socket 1, so I
don't know if it's worth worrying about.  Opinions on that?

I'm not sure either. It doesn't strike me as a particularly relevant
bottleneck. And the old approach of doing more work for every single
connection also made many connections worse, I think?

Alright, let's see if anyone else thinks this is worth fixing for 16.

[RMT hat]

Given this has sat for a bit, I wanted to see if any of your thinking has changed on whether this should be fixed for v16 or v17. I have personally not formed an opinion yet, but per the current discussion, it seems like this could wait?

Thanks,

Jonathan

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to