On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:05 PM, Mirar @ Pike developers forum 10353@lyskom.lysator.liu.se wrote:
Wait, I said REUSEPORT? What's the difference to REUSEADDR? Mysteries of TCP sockets...
Here's a decent explanation, I think:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14388706/socket-options-so-reuseaddr-and-...
ChrisA
Chris Angelico wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:05 PM, Mirar @ Pike developers forum 10353@lyskom.lysator.liu.se wrote:
Wait, I said REUSEPORT? What's the difference to REUSEADDR? Mysteries of TCP sockets...
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14388706/socket-options-so-reuseaddr-and-...
Well, to be honest, I've only ever used and use REUSEADDR. I'd say reuseaddr is more useful than reuseport, because the difference will not be understood by the casual user, and reuseaddr has the DWIM advantage here.
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:33 PM, Stephen R. van den Berg srb@cuci.nl wrote:
Chris Angelico wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:05 PM, Mirar @ Pike developers forum 10353@lyskom.lysator.liu.se wrote:
Wait, I said REUSEPORT? What's the difference to REUSEADDR? Mysteries of TCP sockets...
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14388706/socket-options-so-reuseaddr-and-...
Well, to be honest, I've only ever used and use REUSEADDR. I'd say reuseaddr is more useful than reuseport, because the difference will not be understood by the casual user, and reuseaddr has the DWIM advantage here.
Separately to the REUSE* questions, I've been experimenting today with the IP_TOS settings, and to that end, dusted off this branch.
Changes today:
1) Rebased rosuav/sockopt onto the current 8.1, so it's now current again 2) Changed setsockopt() to take three parameters so the level can be specified 3) Added a bunch more constants, including some from a new header file.
The change is taking effect - I can see it in my outgoing logs - although whether it actually improves performance or not is another question. Example usage:
https://github.com/Rosuav/Gypsum/commit/945b88
ChrisA
Chris Angelico wrote:
Separately to the REUSE* questions, I've been experimenting today with the IP_TOS settings, and to that end, dusted off this branch.
The change is taking effect - I can see it in my outgoing logs - although whether it actually improves performance or not is another question. Example usage:
Looks good. Though it doubtful that setting this flag will have any noticeable effect on the current internet at large.
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 3:08 AM, Stephen R. van den Berg srb@cuci.nl wrote:
Chris Angelico wrote:
Separately to the REUSE* questions, I've been experimenting today with the IP_TOS settings, and to that end, dusted off this branch.
The change is taking effect - I can see it in my outgoing logs - although whether it actually improves performance or not is another question. Example usage:
Looks good. Though it doubtful that setting this flag will have any noticeable effect on the current internet at large.
Maybe not on its own, but I can then apply traffic control rules on the basis of TOS. At very least, patching this in allows me to play around with the feature.
(Though it's looking like my current problem is better solved in other ways anyway. Still nice to be able to experiment.)
ChrisA
I think we should merge this into 8.1. The setsockopt + constants seems like the minimally useful api to me. it also has the benefit of not having to wait for a new pike version in order to use that fancy new kernel feature.
any objections?
arne
On 05/04/15 19:12, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 3:08 AM, Stephen R. van den Berg srb@cuci.nl wrote:
Chris Angelico wrote:
Separately to the REUSE* questions, I've been experimenting today with the IP_TOS settings, and to that end, dusted off this branch.
The change is taking effect - I can see it in my outgoing logs - although whether it actually improves performance or not is another question. Example usage:
Looks good. Though it doubtful that setting this flag will have any noticeable effect on the current internet at large.
Maybe not on its own, but I can then apply traffic control rules on the basis of TOS. At very least, patching this in allows me to play around with the feature.
(Though it's looking like my current problem is better solved in other ways anyway. Still nice to be able to experiment.)
ChrisA
I just did merge those features into pike 8.1. My impression was, that the discussion was pretty much settled. I think the current API is also in line with how similar features work (e.g. linger). I have also added Stdio.getprotobyname() to be able to access options on other levels.
arne
On 05/07/15 13:20, Arne Goedeke wrote:
I think we should merge this into 8.1. The setsockopt + constants seems like the minimally useful api to me. it also has the benefit of not having to wait for a new pike version in order to use that fancy new kernel feature.
any objections?
arne
On 05/04/15 19:12, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 3:08 AM, Stephen R. van den Berg srb@cuci.nl wrote:
Chris Angelico wrote:
Separately to the REUSE* questions, I've been experimenting today with the IP_TOS settings, and to that end, dusted off this branch.
The change is taking effect - I can see it in my outgoing logs - although whether it actually improves performance or not is another question. Example usage:
Looks good. Though it doubtful that setting this flag will have any noticeable effect on the current internet at large.
Maybe not on its own, but I can then apply traffic control rules on the basis of TOS. At very least, patching this in allows me to play around with the feature.
(Though it's looking like my current problem is better solved in other ways anyway. Still nice to be able to experiment.)
ChrisA
pike-devel@lists.lysator.liu.se
-
Arne Goedeke -
Chris Angelico -
Stephen R. van den Berg