At Tue, 12 Sep 2006 02:38:13 +0400, Yar Tikhiy wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 06:28:26PM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 12:36:57AM -0500, Mike Silbersack wrote: > > M> >It stops creating any state (nor socket neither compressed tcptw) for > > the > > M> >TCP connection, where both endpoints were local. This save a lot of > > M> >resources on servers running HTTP accelerators, or database > > M> >servers+clients. > > M> > > M> I think that you should change the description to say "Do not create TCP > > M> TIME_WAIT entries for local <-> local connections" (or something > > similar) > > M> to remove the ambiguity, and turn it on by default for 7. This seems > > like > > M> a good idea, I'm jealous that I didn't think of it. :) > > > > OOh, the sysctl name and its description were discussed with ru@, who > > is our famous nitpicker. If you want to change name or description - > > mail to him. /me hides > > (It was me who suggested a different name for the sysctl in question.) > > IMHO it's time to define a general style for new sysctl names. > The first two points could be a) "foo" vs. "nofoo" for boolean > knobs, and b) underscore usage. > > Presently there seem to be few "nofoo" knobs in the system, e.g.: > > # sysctl -aN | fgrep .no > kern.nodump_coredump -- should be coredump_nodump > net.inet6.icmp6.nodeinfo -- false match > debug.nosleepwithlocks > dev.fxp.0.noflow > > I don't think new ones should be introduced; their logic would be > unnecessarily vague. > > OTOH, there are enough sysctl names containing an underscore to > encourage using it in complex names. An exception could be made > for really short names, such as consisting of not more than 2 words, > each being not longer than 4 letters. > > What do you think about that, folks?
I am for it, in particular if it is documented. Later, George _______________________________________________ cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
