Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use server-initiated track queries to induced client backpressure #48

Open
m-ronnblom opened this issue Mar 29, 2024 · 0 comments
Open
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@m-ronnblom
Copy link
Collaborator

In a scenario when the server sends notify messages to the client at a high rate, for a long period of time, a long backlog of unprocessed messages may build up on a slow client.

If, at that point, the server decided to initiate a track query to assure the client is still alive, the response to this query may be much delayed, due to head-of-line blocking, assuming the client processes the messages in order.

Today, the server relies on than transport connection back-pressure to detect client overload. The host buffers and the network can potentially keep many messages buffered/in-flight. One thing the server could do is to insert track queries into the stream of other notification (e.g., subscription matches). The server could just allow a few such outstanding queries, and delay the transmission of more non-track notifications until a track reply is received. In such a way, the server could ensure that the number of in-flight messages is kept at a reasonable level.

A client could process messages from different transactions out-of-order, and provide track queries with higher priority. That would invalidate the above assumption, but would on the other hand solve the original issue (track replies not getting through).

@m-ronnblom m-ronnblom added the enhancement New feature or request label Mar 29, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant