thrift-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From panfei <cnwe...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: reuse Ttransport or not ?
Date Fri, 20 Jul 2012 04:28:55 GMT
2012/7/20 Mark Slee <mslee@fb.com>

> Agreed with Rush. A couple other considerations worth mentioning here:
>
> - There is a bit of TCP overhead every time you create and then tear down
> a connection, if you're trying to squeeze out really high performance and
> this is the same client talking to the same server, it's preferable not to
> pay that every time
>
> - Re-using the client does mean that the socket is also held open longer
> on the server side. Timeouts may come into play here if there are
> significant delays between client calls. If your server specifies a read
> timeout - it *will* close the client connection after that period elapses
> with no new call being made.
>

Hi Mark , thanks for your reply, and I want to know How to change the read
timeout or set the server without timeout until the client close the
connection?

>
> So, as long as your server is not going to be maxed out on connections
> from tons of different clients, it's generally preferable to re-use.
>
> On 7/19/12 10:02 AM, "Rush Manbert" <rush@manbert.com> wrote:
>
> >On Jul 18, 2012, at 11:45 PM, panfei wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all:
> >>
> >> there maybe a lot of RPC calls from the client to the server, I want to
> >> know , in this case, should I create a transport and keep it opened to
> >>do
> >> the RPC calls , or should I create a transport on every RPC call ? and
> >>why
> >> ? thanks !
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> 不学习,不知道
> >
> >On a *nix system, opening a transport for each RPC call uses a socket.
> >When you close the transport, the system keeps the socket around for a
> >while, so it is unavailable for re-use. Depending on the rate at which
> >you make RPC calls, your system can get starved for sockets, and you will
> >need to add retry logic to handle that. So it's better to open a single
> >client and use it for multiple calls.
> >
> >I'm guessing you would see the same effect from a Windows client.
> >
> >- Rush
>
>


-- 
不学习,不知道

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message