Can I ask why is the timeout a problem? Wouldn't the pool manager just open a new connection when required?


Put another way : is a pool connection that has been idle for 120 seconds actually useful?


On 6/27/2018 1:50 PM, Ghiurea, Isabella wrote:

Hi List

we are running  389-ds-base-1.3.5.15-1.fc24.x86_64 (  OS -FC24)

analyzing access log file today , I am seeing for each of the client T1 msg,  our applications are using www pools connection to ldap we have a large number of hosts cfg for min and max pools size , most of connections are always in a  open/idle state to be reused by the client.

Initial I had nssldap-idletimeout set to 120 sec, but today I went and increase  by factor of 2 in hope to eliminate this T1 msg but no luck so far , the number of file descriptor is set to 4096.

Here is one sample from access log output, I 'm looking to get some input how to tune  DS to eliminate  T1 message

 

Client 6:......

        88 - Connections
        84 - T1 (Idle Timeout Exceeded)

[7] Client:
        87 - Connections
        84 - T1 (Idle Timeout Exceeded)

[8] Client:
        74 - Connections
        70 - T1 (Idle Timeout Exceeded)


Thank you



_______________________________________________
389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/HF42GPECVMNMPSIXOF3GKIGBU2QJTOS4/