Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Refinement Of Maximum Chunk Size Handling #49

Open
bonedaddy opened this issue Apr 17, 2020 · 0 comments
Open

Refinement Of Maximum Chunk Size Handling #49

bonedaddy opened this issue Apr 17, 2020 · 0 comments
Labels
low-priority task at hand is low priority as there isn't an immediate need for it

Comments

@bonedaddy
Copy link

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Previously we had issues with maximum chunk size being reached, and subsequently downloading things from MinIO failed. @xiegeo introduced a fix that serves as an immediate resolution to this problem.

Describe the solution you'd like

While the problem is solved for now, there is room for improvement that allows a configurable chunk size. However with a configurable chunk size comes the problem that someone may configure a chunk size too large, thus we would need some method of detecting too large chunk sizes and either automatically falling back, or erroring out.

Additionally the "maximum chunk size" is actually determined by a value during the initialization of a TemporalX server. In our configuration package I have an upcoming PR to allow controlling the two types of this size:

  • Max receive message size (default to 4MB)
  • Max send message size (default to math.MaxInt32).

Additional Context

As the label says, this is pretty low priority since the issue at hand is solved, and there are other improvements to the codebase that are more desirable.

@bonedaddy bonedaddy added the low-priority task at hand is low priority as there isn't an immediate need for it label Apr 17, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
low-priority task at hand is low priority as there isn't an immediate need for it
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant