y 1, 2017, at 1:13 PM, Michael Marth mmart
> >> h...@adobe.com><mailto:mma...@adobe.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Tyson,
> >>
> >> 10x more throughput, i.e. Being able to run OW at 1/10 of the cost -
> >> definitely worth looking into :)
> >>
> &
dvancement on throughput that would be worth it IMHO.
>> One thing I wonder about, though, is resilience against rogue actions. If
>> an action is blocking (in the Node-sense, not the OW-sense), would that not
>> block Node’s event loop and thus block other actions in that contai
t; an action is blocking (in the Node-sense, not the OW-sense), would that not
> block Node’s event loop and thus block other actions in that container? One
> could argue, though, that this rogue action would only block other
> executions of itself, not affect other actions or customers. WDY
ustomers. WDYT?
Michael
On 01/05/17 17:54, "Tyson Norris"
mailto:tnor...@adobe.com><mailto:tnor...@adobe.com>> wrote:
Hi All -
I created this issue some time ago to discuss concurrent requests on actions:
[1] Some people mentioned discussing on the mailing list so I
elf, not affect other actions or customers. WDYT?
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>
> On 01/05/17 17:54, "Tyson Norris"
> mailto:tnor...@adobe.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi All -
> I created this issue some time ago to discuss concurrent requests on actions:
> [1] S
nor...@adobe.com>>
wrote:
Hi All -
I created this issue some time ago to discuss concurrent requests on actions:
[1] Some people mentioned discussing on the mailing list so I wanted to start
that discussion.
I’ve been doing some testing against this branch with Markus’s work on the new
would only block other executions of
itself, not affect other actions or customers. WDYT?
Michael
On 01/05/17 17:54, "Tyson Norris" wrote:
>Hi All -
>I created this issue some time ago to discuss concurrent requests on actions:
>[1] Some people mentioned discussing on th
Hi All -
I created this issue some time ago to discuss concurrent requests on actions:
[1] Some people mentioned discussing on the mailing list so I wanted to start
that discussion.
I’ve been doing some testing against this branch with Markus’s work on the new
container pool: [2]
I believe
