19 messages in com.perforce.perforce-userTIME_WAIT conditions
FromSent OnAttachments
PatH...@marketguide.com17 Jun 1999 14:39 
Tony...@informix.com17 Jun 1999 15:37 
Tony...@informix.com17 Jun 1999 15:37 
PatH...@marketguide.com17 Jun 1999 16:14 
PatH...@marketguide.com17 Jun 1999 16:14 
RobC...@within.com17 Jun 1999 18:36 
Jona...@floorboard.com17 Jun 1999 21:06 
PatH...@marketguide.com18 Jun 1999 07:02 
PatH...@marketguide.com18 Jun 1999 07:02 
Jaso...@tempest.com18 Jun 1999 07:28 
PatH...@marketguide.com21 Jun 1999 12:13 
PatH...@marketguide.com21 Jun 1999 12:13 
PatH...@marketguide.com21 Jun 1999 12:13 
Chri...@perforce.com21 Jun 1999 17:12 
WesP...@softweyr.com22 Jun 1999 07:56 
Neil...@c-side.com22 Jun 1999 13:23 
Neil...@c-side.com22 Jun 1999 14:01 
PatH...@marketguide.com23 Jun 1999 07:11 
WesP...@softweyr.com23 Jun 1999 19:23 
Subject:TIME_WAIT conditions
From:PatH...@marketguide.com (PatH@marketguide.com)
Date:06/18/1999 07:02:55 AM
List:com.perforce.perforce-user

You know, I was told the same thing, but all my problems with it went away with 99.1. Prior to that we saw lots of malingering sockets.

My argument always was: if Apache can service thousands and thousands of connections without leaving sockets hanging in TIME_WAIT, why can't perforce?

As far as I can tell, it's fixed in 99.1.

We're running Linux 2.0.27/AXP on our server.

Rob

We're running Solaris 2.6 & 99.1

----------------- Pat Hardy - Web Developer Market Guide, Inc (NASDAQ: MARG) I haven't lost my mind; Lake Success, Long Island, NY 11042-1011 it's backed up on tape http://www.marketguide.com somewhere. Telephone: 516 327 2400 x228