MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 In-Reply-To: <1289346951.5921534.1398691253982.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.0.6_GA_5922 (ZimbraWebClient - FF28 (Linux)/8.0.6_GA_5922) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Message-ID: <726965977.5930657.1398692151706.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Received: from mx.pao1.isc.org (mx.pao1.isc.org [149.20.64.53]) by bugs.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CC532D20571 for ; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 13:35:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx6-phx2.redhat.com (mx6-phx2.redhat.com [209.132.183.39]) by mx.pao1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7205C3493B0 for ; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 13:35:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from thozza@redhat.com) Received: from zmail19.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (zmail19.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.83.22]) by mx6-phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s3SDZpw4008934 for ; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 09:35:51 -0400 Delivered-To: bind-suggest@bugs.isc.org Subject: Hardcoded number of handled clients in LWRESD Return-Path: X-Original-To: bind-suggest@bugs.isc.org Thread-Index: vvyW0RY9aksQZ6XX9PctXqWlKpsBOA== Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 09:35:51 -0400 (EDT) Thread-Topic: Hardcoded number of handled clients in LWRESD X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on mx.pao1.isc.org X-Originating-Ip: [10.5.82.12] To: bind-suggest@isc.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Tomas Hozza X-RT-Original-Encoding: utf-8 Content-Length: 874 Hello. When using lwresd, the number of clients that can be handled seems to be hard-coded in the bin/named/lwresd.c (lines 63-67): ... /*! * The total number of clients we can handle will be NTASKS * NRECVS. */ #define NTASKS 2 /*%< tasks to create to handle lwres queries */ #define NRECVS 2 /*%< max clients per task */ ... Is there any specific reason for this? Would you be OK with having a configuration option(s) in the 'lwres' statement that would enable setting the NTASKS/NRECVS to a different value? Do you have any specific requirements on how such options should be named? Should there be any (maximum) limit for the values? I can work on a patch once I get your response. Thank you in advance. Regards, -- Tomas Hozza Software Engineer - EMEA ENG Developer Experience PGP: 1D9F3C2D Red Hat Inc. http://cz.redhat.com