Folks, Any comments? I will start to implement withFairAsync(); decorator soon.
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:22 PM Dmitriy Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com> wrote: > Igniters, > > I've re-read this thread in brief. As far as I know this change is not > coming from some company, so this change will be at least good for healthy > community building. > > And I didn't find any obstacles why not to implement approach with new mode > .withFairAsync() for cases user is completely aware of consequences. > > It could be not public API to avoid anyone will use it. It could be > used,e.g. in integrations and by qualified users to gain as much > throutghput as it is possible. > > So I would like to be an sponsor here. If anyone or Dmitriy G. will > contribute this change, I will merge it. I hope PMCs are agree here and > will not veto this change. > > Sincerely, > Dmitriy Pavlov > > чт, 24 мая 2018 г. в 15:13, Yakov Zhdanov <yzhda...@apache.org>: > > > Alexey Goncharuk, I remember we started working on async connection > > establishment. This should fix latency issue related to network which I > > believe gives the most contribution to overall latency. Mapping logic and > > other stuff can be ignored as it can very rarely be an issue at least on > > stable tolopogies. What is the status with async connections? That would > > really be a huge improvement! > > > > Also please remember that uncontrolled async operations may lead to OOME, > > therefore at some point when there are too many uncompleted async > > operations newly invoked async operations should become synchronous, i.e. > > we should return completed future, ignoring the fact that user expected > us > > to be async. > > > > I would like to have very strong reasons to start reapproaching this. > > > > --Yakov > > >
