Good idea. The implementation should provide an appropriate exception to prevent the client from reconnecting continuously if it reaches the limitation. Do other modules also need this?
Michael Marshall <mmarsh...@apache.org> 于2022年8月16日周二 13:52写道： > Good idea, it makes sense to me to add this to the proxy. > > > BTW, are there any side effects from the implementation? > > Reading through the code from > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/10754, it looks like the cost is > minimal. The broker maintains counters for each IP address, and they > are incremented/decremented when a ServerCnx goes active/inactive. > > Thanks, > Michael > > On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 11:27 PM Haiting Jiang <jianghait...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Sounds good. It's good for server stability. > > > > BTW, are there any side effects from the implementation? > > > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 10:33 AM mattison chao <mattisonc...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi, All > > > > > > Pulsar has the `brokerMaxConnectionsPerIp` configuration at the > > > broker, we can use it to limit the maximum connections per IP. > > > > > > The original motivation and PR here: > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/10754 > > > > > > IMO, we can also apply it to pulsar-proxy, because when a large > > > number of proxy accesses under the same IP (maybe due to some wrong > > > operations) will cause the proxy to accept too much wrong traffic and > > > cause service unstable. > > > > > > WDYT? > > > > > > Best, > > > Mattison > > > > -- BR, Qiang Huang
