- From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 15:12:26 -0700
- To: Daniel Sommermann <dcsommer@fb.com>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAP+FsNfTFAS4zkjo4VdKse3Dq+qSEgUKwoFqo2+4iki17VzHhQ@mail.gmail.com>
Ages ago in spdy-land we discussed a LAME_DUCK frame, which would indicate that a server would going away in a certain amount of time, but... never seemed important enough to bother. -=R On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Daniel Sommermann <dcsommer@fb.com> wrote: > In our implementation experience, GOAWAY as specified today is not an > ideal mechanism for graceful shutdown. When there is high RTT between a > proxy and the server, many requests may be in flight when the server > generates a GOAWAY. For clients, it seems the solution is to reissue the > request. The same strategy doesn't work for proxies. A proxy would have to > buffer the headers and body of all requests until it sees the beginning of > a response just in case a GOAWAY is received from the server. This is > obviously not ideal as it puts high memory requirements on the proxy for a > rare case. > > The server could implement some workarounds like "pre-acking" some number > of streams in its GOAWAY just in case there are some in flight requests, > but this doesn't seem like a great solution. > > Is there a way we can improve GOAWAY so that proxies can issue zero errors > during a server restart and stay safe from a memory usage perspective? I'd > be interested to hear others' implementation experience on this topic. > >
Received on Thursday, 10 April 2014 22:12:53 UTC