httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Slemko <ma...@znep.com>
Subject Re: [PATCH] lingering_close cleanups
Date Fri, 24 Jan 1997 02:39:35 GMT
On Thu, 23 Jan 1997, Roy T. Fielding wrote:

> > It is why the archives say SO_LINGER was tried and lingering_close was
> > added (the code was offered by RST in a response to this problem, but most
> > likely after discussion of it and why it is needed for other reasons
> > privately).  If you just do a close() on the broken systems, the client
> > gets truncated responses.  A supposed (as per the sockets FAQ) workaround
> > is to do a shutdown() first; the shutdown is supposed to properly flush
> > the queue without destroying data.  
> 
> Yeah, but that is what the first shutdown(sd, 1) does.  An additional
> shutdown(sd, 2) would just close the input end of the socket, which
> we don't care about destroying.

Duh.

You are correct.  I thought I had went through that and figured out that  
we still needed it for some reason, but I think I'm crazy.  In any case, I
can't think of any reason now.


On Thu, 23 Jan 1997, Randy Terbush wrote:

> The current version seems to be working fine on FreeBSD. More connections
> in FIN_WAIT_2, but luckily being timed out.

More than without it or more than without no lingering_close()?


Mime
View raw message