Subject: [DISCUSS] KIP-601: Configurable socket connection timeout

Hi Cheng,

Let me rephrase my question. Let's say we didn't have the case of
leastLoadedNode. We are only talking about connections to a specific node
(i.e. leader or controller). We have a lot of these and I want to
understand the benefits of the proposed timeout in this case alone. We
currently have a request timeout of 30s. Would you consider adding a 10s
connection timeout? And if you did, what would you expect the 10s timeout
to do?

a) We could fail a request if connection didn't complete within 10s. If we
always expect connections to succeed within 10s, this would be considered
reasonable behaviour. But this would be changing the current default, which
allows you up to 30 seconds to connect and process a request.
b) We retry the connection. What would be the point? We were waiting in a
queue for connecting, but we decide to stop and join the back of the queue.

We have KIP-612 that is proposing to throttle connection set up on the one
hand and this KIP that is dramatically reducing default connection timeout
on the other. Not sure if that is a good idea.
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 1:26 AM Cheng Tan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: