Message123632
> it may be very convenient and the performance overhead may be barely noticeable.
Convenient for what ?
If the remote end doesn't send a FIN or RST packet, then the TCP/IP stack has no way of knowing the remote end is down.
Successfull return of send(2) never meant a succesfull delivery to the other end, see man page :
"No indication of failure to deliver is implicit in a send(). Locally detected errors are indicated by a return value of -1. "
If your remote application doesn't close its socket cleanly, then your application is broken.
To guard against that, you could use TCP keepalive... |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2010-12-08 18:51:56 | neologix | set | recipients:
+ neologix, pitrou, diekmann |
2010-12-08 18:51:56 | neologix | set | messageid: <1291834316.56.0.821127842863.issue10644@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2010-12-08 18:51:55 | neologix | link | issue10644 messages |
2010-12-08 18:51:55 | neologix | create | |
|