- Apiserver add a new flag --goaway-chance which is the fraction of requests that will be closed gracefully(GOAWAY) to prevent HTTP/2 clients from getting stuck on a single apiserver. 
  After the connection closed(received GOAWAY), the client's other in-flight requests won't be affected, and the client will reconnect. 

      if (array[i] > max) {
        max = array[i];
      }
    }
    return max;
  }

  /**
   * Returns the value nearest to {@code value} which is within the closed range {@code [min..max]}.
   *
   * <p>If {@code value} is within the range {@code [min..max]}, {@code value} is returned
   * unchanged. If {@code value} is less than {@code min}, {@code min} is returned, and if {@code

      if (array[i] > max) {
        max = array[i];
      }
    }
    return max;
  }

  /**
   * Returns the value nearest to {@code value} which is within the closed range {@code [min..max]}.
   *
   * <p>If {@code value} is within the range {@code [min..max]}, {@code value} is returned
   * unchanged. If {@code value} is less than {@code min}, {@code min} is returned, and if {@code

And as you can have parallelism and asynchronicity at the same time, you get higher performance than most of the tested NodeJS frameworks and on par with Go, which is a compiled language closer to C <a href="https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r17&hw=ph&test=query&l=zijmkf-1" class="external-link" target="_blank">(all thanks to Starlette)</a>.

### Is concurrency better than parallelism?

      oos.writeObject(o);
      oos.flush();
      oos.close();
      ObjectInputStream ois = new ObjectInputStream(new ByteArrayInputStream(bos.toByteArray()));
      T clone = (T) ois.readObject();
      assertSame(o.getClass(), clone.getClass());
      return clone;
    } catch (Throwable t) {
      threadUnexpectedException(t);
      return null;
    }
  }

   * Builder#build} is called, the builder is likely to perform better than an unsized {@link
   * #builder()} would have.
   *
   * <p>It is not specified if any performance benefits apply if {@code expectedSize} is close to,
   * but not exactly, the number of elements added to the builder.
   *
   * @since 23.1
   */
  public static <E> Builder<E> builderWithExpectedSize(int expectedSize) {

					t.Logf("unexpected error: %T: %v", err, err)
					return
				}
				mu.Lock()
				errs++
				mu.Unlock()
				return
			}
			mu.Lock()
			ok++
			mu.Unlock()
		}()
	}
	close(start)
	wg.Wait()
	if ok != 1 {
		t.Fatalf("want 1 ok, got %d", ok)
	}
	if errs != n-1 {
		t.Fatalf("want %d errors, got %d", n-1, errs)
	}
}

list-group-item-action.active{color:#fff;background-color:#1b1e21;border-color:#1b1e21}.close{float:right;font-size:1.5rem;font-weight:700;line-height:1;color:#000;text-shadow:0 1px 0 #fff;opacity:.5}.close:hover{color:#000;text-decoration:none}.close:not(:disabled):not(.disabled):focus,.close:not(:disabled):not(.disabled):hover{opacity:.75}button.close{padding:0;background-color:transparent;border:0}a.close.disabled{pointer-events:none}.toast{-ms-flex-preferred-size:350px;flex-basis:350px;max-w...

   * B>`, convertAll could accept and return iterables with nullable element types. In both cases,
   * we've chosen to instead use a signature that benefits existing users -- and is still safe.
   *
   * For convertAll, I haven't looked as closely at *how* much existing users benefit, so we should
   * keep an eye out for problems that new users encounter. Note also that convertAll could support

		return err
	}

	targetList, err := fetchSubSysTargets(ctx, cfg, subSys, transport)
	if err != nil {
		return err
	}

	for _, target := range targetList {
		defer target.Close()
	}

	tgts, ok := ctx.Value(config.ContextKeyForTargetFromConfig).(map[string]bool)
	if !ok {
		tgts = make(map[string]bool)
	}
	for _, target := range targetList {
		if tgts[target.ID().ID] {