Does increasing the HTTP connection limit also increase the burden on the
server and network?
Increasing the HTTP connection limit on one client might improve the
experience for one person. It might also diminish the experience for
everyone else on the same server.
Sheet Spotter
-Original
I would agree with you if all decent HTTP servers (Apache, but not
only), didn't have their own throttling algorithms are weren't able
to just drop the excess of connections when they run out of sockets.
But they do have such throttling mechanisms, so it's no issue at all
and in fact, 32 is the max
On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 10:07:18 +0200
Henri Beauchamp wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 05:23:15 +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 16:59:18 -0400
> > holydoughnuts wrote:
> >
> > The implementation that I wrote for Singularity (not yet in the
> > the official release) is more on the s
Problem solved !...
Man, what a sh*tty, Mickey Mouse OS Windoze (or "Windaube", in French,
for puns amateurs) can be ... Its UTTER stupidity and hackiness
NEVER cease to amaze me !
The reasons for all my troubles were that:
- windows.h contains a "#pragam once" directive (instead of standard
Greetings, folks !
I just ran into a problem that lets me quite clueless: I recently migrated
the Cool VL Viewer build system from VS2005 to VS2010 and succeeded, two
weeks ago, to compile v1.26.5.0 under VS2010.
This week, I was about to make two new releases (v1.26.4.23 which is basically
the s
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/592/#review1243
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Lance Corrimal
On July 25, 2012, 3:12 p.m
> On July 28, 2012, 2:15 a.m., Lance Corrimal wrote:
> > I think the warning message should either go, or be modified to warn only
> > once, or be changed to lldebug... the way it is now it floods the
> > logfiles... i have 1900 repeats of that warning line in my log file, after
> > being logg
On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 05:23:15 +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 16:59:18 -0400
> holydoughnuts wrote:
>
> The implementation that I wrote for Singularity (not yet in the
> the official release) is more on the side of "blazing fast" :p.
> The bottleneck is entirely server-side, but I'
