blob: 3f18b58037248ff1575528457f8ef7a3abbae1b1 (
plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
|
== Problem: Containerize Activities or Instances? == #none
We're presently on the fence about whether to isolate different instances of
activities from one another.
Situation:
Ivan doesn't think it's worth it; Noah is concerned about controlling the
spread of viral documents.
Michael doesn't feel strongly about it; he doesn't see much difference in
implementation difficulty.
Michael thinks the usability issue is going to come down to the fact that we
rate-limit by container. If instances are packed into one container, then
long-running background downloads could really mess up your browsing
experience. If they're allocated per-instance, though, we don't (at the
moment) have any hard bounds on allowable resource usage.
Either way, if the user is going to rely on Rainbow (as opposed to the app
itself) to do rate-limiting, then we might find ourselves constantly
twiddling limits in order to make a decent browsing experience.
Also, do we ever need to firewall instances, or just activities as a whole?
(Incidentally, how *are* we going to rate-limit activity startup?)
Plan:
Followup:
|
