W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: delta encoding and state management

From: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:50:34 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOdDvNrR+pCKujywHjbJ+ksEkLZE-H=AvD3wJnvGf+_7Hv=Ldg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Cc: "William Chan (?????????)" <willchan@chromium.org>, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:

>
> You don't count the trend in user count which is faster than the trend
> in RAM price unfortunately. I've had several times people ask me what
> to change in their kernel to go beyond 1 million concurrent connections
> in haproxy. A few years ago, they were only talking about several tens
> of thousands. With everything device connected to everything all the
> time, I don't expect this trend to revert any time soon :-/
>

Hey Wily,

you're a wicked smart guy with customers backed by millions of people and
resources. Your problem is a "simple" (jokingly!) matter of engineering
bigger systems.

The latency problem is inherent in the speed of light and can't be fixed in
the same way. I remain convinced that it should trump other objectives when
designing the protocol.

That being said, I'm not here arguing for RAM bloat! All I said is that if
state can be justified by an improvement against the latency problem then
it is truly justified. If another scheme can do the same with less state -
then that's more awesome!

-Patrick
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2013 14:51:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 24 January 2013 14:51:04 GMT