question about conn_read and conn_nread states
brad at danga.com
Sat Apr 8 20:34:22 UTC 2006
I don't remember without reading the source, but just to play devil's
advocate: if you're worried about DOS attacks from your internal
machines, don't you have bigger problems?
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006, Torsten Foertsch wrote:
> if I understood the source correctly a connection is in conn_read state if a
> command is expected and in conn_nread if an item is read. Why does
> try_read_network() which is called in conn_read just after try_read_command()
> try to read as much data from the network as possible allocating more and
> more buffer space. Wouldn't that ask for a DOS attack?
> Why not read a limited buffer say 8k? Every command does probably fit into
> that space. The rest of the item is then read in conn_nread.
More information about the memcached