[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Hash Table Collisions (n.runs-SA-2011.004)
- From: Javier Guerra Giraldez <javier@...>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 10:31:10 -0500
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Mark Hamburg <mark@grubmah.com> wrote:
>> in the original paper, the danger is in hashtables with keys from the
>> network. they would totally survive a GC.
>
> How? I'm assuming they are delivered as part of the HTTP header. Presumably most web servers wouldn't need to keep around the results of parsing headers from previous requests.
ah, no; previous requests should die soon.
but if the 'too many collisions' alarm is handled at a lower level, it
might fire long before the current request is discarded. perhaps if
the whole client connection is surrounded by pcall(), and the alert
causes a detectable error....
--
Javier
- References:
- Re: Hash Table Collisions (n.runs-SA-2011.004), TNHarris
- Re: Hash Table Collisions (n.runs-SA-2011.004), Mark Hamburg
- Re: Hash Table Collisions (n.runs-SA-2011.004), Tom N Harris
- Re: Hash Table Collisions (n.runs-SA-2011.004), Mark Hamburg
- Re: Hash Table Collisions (n.runs-SA-2011.004), Vladimir Protasov
- Re: Hash Table Collisions (n.runs-SA-2011.004), Leo Razoumov
- Re: Hash Table Collisions (n.runs-SA-2011.004), David Kolf
- Re: Hash Table Collisions (n.runs-SA-2011.004), Matthew Wild
- Re: Hash Table Collisions (n.runs-SA-2011.004), Mark Hamburg
- Re: Hash Table Collisions (n.runs-SA-2011.004), Javier Guerra Giraldez
- Re: Hash Table Collisions (n.runs-SA-2011.004), Mark Hamburg