gRPC streaming issue with linkerd 1.1.3
See original GitHub issueHello,
I’m experiencing an issue with gRPC streaming in linkerd 1.1.3
. I have a gRPC server that sends a few thousand messages to a stream and a client that consumes them. After a few hundred messages (depends on message size) linkerd stops accepting new ones and my server and client just hang (or timeout expires). It does not happen on small streams (a couple of messages), also linkerd 1.1.2
works fine, I can send as many messages as I want.
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 6 years ago
- Comments:5 (4 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
RST_STREAM errors with gRPC - Kubernetes - Linkerd
I get service-to-service communication just fine until I restart one of my pods, at which point I begin to get “stream terminated by...
Read more >4 ways enterprise architects are using gRPC in the real world
Implementing gRPC streaming to report vehicle location ... One of the interesting features of gRPC is that it supports continuous bidirectional ...
Read more >Why is load balancing gRPC tricky? - Hacker News
As with so many things gRPC, they've had an open issue about it for ... assuming a default of 100 concurrent streams per...
Read more >grpc/grpc - Gitter
I am having an issue trying to compile an android application using GRPC. ... 'androidx.constraintlayout:constraintlayout:1.1.3' implementation ...
Read more >Troubleshoot gRPC on .NET Core - Microsoft Learn
This document discusses commonly encountered problems when developing gRPC apps on .NET. Mismatch between client and service SSL/TLS ...
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
Correct!
@adleong, this was fixed in #1598, correct?