MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.505 (Entity 5.505) Content-Disposition: inline X-RT-Interface: Web References: <56D0F465.5010402@illinois.edu> <56D61663.8050108@illinois.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Message-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary X-RT-Original-Encoding: utf-8 RT-Send-CC: X-RT-Encrypt: 0 X-RT-Sign: 0 Content-Length: 1028 On Tue Mar 01 22:23:36 2016, dmrz@illinois.edu wrote: > Hi Shawn, > > Thanks very much for the quick and informative response! I look forward > to seeing fixes in 4.3.5. > > David > > P.S. Limiting the frequency of pings to the same target makes perfect > sense to me; perhaps an easy solution would be to perform the same > recently-used check before deciding to reclaim a particular abandoned > lease in the first place (i.e. if the lease was marked abandoned so > recently that we wouldn't be willing to ping it again yet, then we don't > attempt to reclaim it at all). > We can consider that as an option. Part of the problem is the nature of the testing we both did. In the test there is only a very small number of leases and the are all abandoned. In this case the serve has two bad options - don't hand out a lease or try to reuse an abandoned lease - which is worse is somewhat dependent on the rest of your set up. In a more normal situation with a larger number of leases this occurrence is less likely.