Re: backporting COUCHDB-1008 into 1.1.x

2011-01-31 Thread Jan Lehnardt
On 31 Jan 2011, at 20:55, Filipe David Manana wrote: > Hi, > > In 1.1.x we have a new configuration option named "nodelay" under the > the "httpd" section. > However, COUCHDB-1008 adds the option "socket_options" which is more > generic, allowing nodelay to be specified there amongst other socke

Re: backporting COUCHDB-1008 into 1.1.x

2011-01-31 Thread Paul Davis
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Filipe David Manana wrote: > Hi, > > In 1.1.x we have a new configuration option named "nodelay" under the > the "httpd" section. > However, COUCHDB-1008 adds the option "socket_options" which is more > generic, allowing nodelay to be specified there amongst other

backporting COUCHDB-1008 into 1.1.x

2011-01-31 Thread Filipe David Manana
Hi, In 1.1.x we have a new configuration option named "nodelay" under the the "httpd" section. However, COUCHDB-1008 adds the option "socket_options" which is more generic, allowing nodelay to be specified there amongst other socket options. My concern is that having "nodelay" as an isolated opti