Re: [Sks-devel] Another Poison Key?

[Andrew Gallagher]

On 18/01/2019 11:17, Simon Lange wrote:
> Am 18.01.2019 11:01, schrieb Andrew Gallagher:
>> On 18/01/2019 06:09, Gabor Kiss wrote:
>>> Is "... while gossip disabled. Ignoring." is normal?
>>
>> Yes. SKS is single-threaded, so while it is in the middle of a task it
>> politely ignores incoming network requests.
> 
> And how do we tell sks to use more than ONE instance for the SAME
> database?!

You don't. SKS just isn't built that way. To get concurrency, you need
to run multiple separate instances of SKS and configure them to gossip
between each other. Then you can put a load balancing reverse proxy in
front to simulate a multi-threaded server. Kristian and a few others
have been operating this way for a while now.

> Any chance that sks will be fixed some day?

Short answer, no. SKS is effectively running as end-of-life software at
this point. It gets emergency bugfixes but little else. The improvements
you are talking about would require an enormous refactoring of the
codebase, likely requiring migration to a different database engine.
Given that there are fundamental design flaws (poison keys) that aren't
getting fixed, performance issues just aren't on the radar. Sorry.

-- 
Andrew Gallagher

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature