|
|
|
|
|
|
by maerF0x0
809 days ago
|
|
|
if you're round robining clients w/o sticky assignment then you're going to get nodes*limit consumption. Not correct. Also if you give limit/nodes per node and random assign a connection, you get correct answers on average, but a really janky pattern at the edge case (a user gets a 429, and retries and succeeds, then gets 429 again as they consume those last few requests). |
|
|
Fair point, using in-mem storage changes the meaning of the limit, since accounting changes to local. Something to consider in the library API.