enable reuseport then only one worker is working?

Jim Ohlstein jim at ohlste.in
Tue Mar 1 17:50:57 UTC 2016


> On Mar 1, 2016, at 12:27 PM, Maxim Konovalov <maxim at nginx.com> wrote:
>> On 3/1/16 8:19 PM, Jim Ohlstein wrote:
>> Hello,
>> On Mar 1, 2016, at 9:35 AM, Maxim Konovalov <maxim at nginx.com
>> <mailto:maxim at nginx.com>> wrote:
>>>> On 3/1/16 5:23 PM, Jim Ohlstein wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>> On 3/1/16 8:34 AM, Andrew Hutchings wrote:
>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>> On 01/03/16 13:10, Jim Ohlstein wrote:
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>> On 2/28/16 11:22 PM, Валентин Бартенев wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sunday 28 February 2016 08:52:12 meteor8488 wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>>> I just upgrade Nginx from 1.8 o 1.9 on my FreeBSD box.
>>>>>>> [..]
>>>>>>>> Did I miss anything in the configuration? or for a busy server,
>>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>> better
>>>>>>>> to use accept_mutex instead of reuseport?
>>>>>>> [..]
>>>>>>> In FreeBSD the SO_REUSEPORT option has completely different
>>>>>>> behavior
>>>>>>> and shouldn't be enabled in nginx.
>>>>>> Should the configruation option then be disabled or silently
>>>>>> ignored in
>>>>>> FreeBSD at this time?
>>>>> It would be difficult to selectively ignore operating systems
>>>>> based on
>>>>> how this function is supported. Especially if that support changes
>>>>> over
>>>>> time.
>>>> I don't claim to know how "difficult" that would be, but with all
>>>> the extremely talented coders in the Nginx group, I would think that
>>>> "difficult" would not be a barrier to "doing it right". If OS
>>>> support changes, nginx can change. Something tells me that with a
>>>> FreeBSD Core Team member on the Nginx payroll, if this OS feature
>>>> changes, it'll filter through to the people who write the code.
>>> Jim, we don't have any FreeBSD core team members on payroll.
>> Perhaps you can understand my confusion when I see multiple
>> references to it online, including this
>> tweet. https://mobile.twitter.com/maximkonovalov/status/486847353484480512. 
>> That, and the recent work sponsored by Nginx on FreeBSD sendfile(2)
>> to be included in the upcoming release (11). If he is no longer on
>> the payroll he is still working closely with you, so this hardly
>> invalidates my premise that you would be aware of future changes in
>> FreeBSD behavior.  ;)
> Jim, that was 1.6+ years ago, this is not true anymore.
> Can we return to the technical part of the discussion?

Perhaps you missed the little wink there. My apologies. 

My point is that I would like to see more rigorous, bullet-proof config parsing/testing on the part of nginx. This is one example. We can agree to disagree on its importance to users. 


More information about the nginx mailing list