Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> [01/06/01 10:32]:
> > No way! If I implement a HA application which depends on link status, I
> > want the info to be accurate, I don't want to know that 30 seconds ago I
> > had good link.
> >
> > IMHO, rate limiting is the only solution.
>
> Please re-read your comment. Then think about it. Then tell me how rate limiting
> differs from caching to the application.
>
I'd argue for rate limiting as the application only gets back new data,
never a cached value n times in a row.
With caching, you'd have to let the application know when the cached
value was last read and how long it will be cached for. With rate
limiting, you'd just block the app and get the new data to the app
once the timer has expired. Or, if the app doesn't read the data
until after the timer has expired, it will not block at all.
Seems to me that you'd have less redundant application processing with
rate limiting.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 07 2001 - 21:00:15 EST