Re: [PATCH] Move timeout handling from ConnOpener::connect to ConnOpener::timeout

On 01/24/2013 06:37 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:

>>> /* When one connection closes, give accept() a chance, if need be */
>>> Comm::AcceptLimiter::Instance().kick();
>
> This one might kick us. (sorry bad pun).

Heh! AFAICT, this kick() might deprive us from an FD slot later if we
were using the last FD available (and now closing it because of the
connect failures that we are hoping to overcome on a retry). I do not
think this is a problem because ConnOpener will handle the corresponding
conn_openex() "FD limit" error as any other. After all, ConnOpener may
run out of FDs even if we did not kick any pending accepts.

Did I miss any bad side effects of this kick()?

> IIRC it was just the isOpen() and F->closing() logics that were the
> problem. If that has gone away like it seems to I have no issue with
> using comm_close() other than a token hand waving in the direction of
> performance.

Sounds good. Since this is a rare failure case, I do not think we need
to optimize it at the expense of code quality.

If no other side effects are spotted, and I have the time, I will try
comm_close(), which will remove one more instance of direct fd_table
manipulation, and a nasty/complex one!

Thank you,

Alex.
Received on Fri Jan 25 2013 - 04:34:45 MST