Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 03:27:40 +1000 From: Lawrence Stewart <lstewart@freebsd.org> To: Eric van Gyzen <vangyzen@freebsd.org>, Hiren Panchasara <hiren@freebsd.org> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r283136 - head/sys/netinet Message-ID: <555CC40C.1070502@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <555C89F4.9080607@FreeBSD.org> References: <201505200108.t4K181No006311@svn.freebsd.org> <555C09D5.9090709@freebsd.org> <20150520042438.GA95600@strugglingcoder.info> <555C2ABC.60102@freebsd.org> <555C89F4.9080607@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 05/20/15 23:19, Eric van Gyzen wrote: > On 05/20/2015 02:33, Lawrence Stewart wrote: >> On 05/20/15 14:24, Hiren Panchasara wrote: >>> On 05/20/15 at 02:13P, Lawrence Stewart wrote: >>>> Hi Hiren, >>>> >>>> On 05/20/15 11:08, Hiren Panchasara wrote: >>>>> Author: hiren Date: Wed May 20 01:08:01 2015 New Revision: >>>>> 283136 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/283136 >>>>> >>>>> Log: Add a new sysctl net.inet.tcp.hostcache.purgenow=1 to >>>>> expire and purge all entries in hostcache immediately. >>>>> >>>>> In collaboration with: bz, rwatson MFC after: 1 week Relnotes: >>>>> yes Sponsored by: Limelight Networks >>>> >>>> Why introduce a new sysctl and not change the existing behaviour >>>> of net.inet.tcp.hostcache.purge? >>> >>> I thought it'd make more sense to keep the existing behavior as is >>> and provide new knob for the new behavior. >> >> Don't think so - why would deferring a purge to the next purge run be >> useful compared to purging immediately? I'd strongly suggest you adapt >> this change to the existing purge sysctl. I can't see why anyone would >> miss the old functionality. > > I am generally wary of a question such as "Why would anyone want...", because as soon as the code is released, someone answers it. > > That being said, I have always wanted Hiren's purgenow behavior, and I've always been annoyed by the lazy-purge behavior. I would suggest implementing Lawrence's suggestion, but NOT MFC'ing it, since that would be a disruptive change. > > Thanks for your work, Hiren. I see no reason not to MFC it - it's not a POLA violation for a stable branch. When the user requests a purge, it's surely equally as good (and I think anyone of right mind would argue better ;) to purge immediately than some number of seconds "n" in the future, where "n" is between 1 and the value of net.inet.tcp.hostcache.prune. Cheers, Lawrence
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?555CC40C.1070502>