|
From: Alain F. <ala...@ri...> - 2002-05-06 08:19:12
|
On Fri, 2002-05-03 at 23:29, Gabriele Bartolini wrote: > >Now perhaps we should argue that server_wait_time in this case should > >apply to a wait *after* we make max_connection_requests in a row. >=20 > Yeah, >=20 > I think your proposal is fine. If we enable persistent connections,=20 > server_wait_time partially loses its meaning; I'd rather vote for ignorin= g=20 > it when pcs are on. Or maybe as Geoff says, after the max requests in a r= ow=20 > are reached. >=20 > What d'u think about this? According to me, traversing a HTTP server using pcs, without waiting server_wait_time after reaching the max_connection_requests value is the same that traversing a HTTP server without server_wait_time and pcs. The results is a high load on the HTTP server(s), specially if indexation occurs in a local network. With or without pcs, I think server_wait_time must be applied after each connection (or max_connection_requests) if needed. --=20 Alain FORCIOLI http://www.VigiNews.com/ http://www.risc.fr/ ala...@ri... http://www.april.org/ afo...@ap... =09 GPG Public Key: http://www.risc.fr/~af/gpg.txt |