[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I agree with you. I didn't notice this way. > Thank you ! > > But anyway, don't you think, all of the Mina team > and other people, that when one call the close().join() > function on a session, one could assume that > it will wait (with the join() feature) until > all pending sending messages are really sent ? > > For me, my logic is that if I call close().join(), > it should wait for all messages to be gone. > As the usual meaning of close (filechannel, stream, ...). > > I agree with you that calling session.close() should wait until all pending writes have been written before closing the connection. That would be more in line with how it works with streams (close() flushes out everything written before closing the stream) and I think that is what most users would expect.
However, the way session.close() works currently also has it's uses. Sometimes you may want to close a session forcefully without flushing anything. But it might be better to introduce a new method for that like session.destroy(). WDYT? -- Niklas Therning Software Architect www.spamdrain.net
