On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 2:00 PM, Justin Erenkrantz <jus...@erenkrantz.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Lieven Govaerts <l...@mobsol.be> wrote: >>> How is it supposed to retry? ra_serf needs to let the context_run >>> loop execute again to pull off the remaining bits from the socket. >>> Without the patch, we treat EAGAIN as a fatal error and it gets >>> returned all the way to the client. -- justin >> >> Hm, I see now, it's not the return code of the response handler here, >> but the apr error wrapped in the svn error object. > > Right. > >> So why would we insist on treating EAGAIN as error in the response >> handler? There doesn't seem to be any added value of passing this >> expected return code as error all the way back to the look. > > So, what should we do when EAGAIN is returned by the socket? The code > needs to know to run the loop again...without triggering a fatal > error.
The loop will continue automatically of the status returned from serf_context_run = APR_SUCCESS and if there is no err object set by the response handler. So the response handler should not set an err object, but return APR_EAGAIN as return code to serf. Hm, this is what already happens in the process_body: section of handle_response in ra_serf/util.c. When does EAGAIN get returned? When reading the status lines, response headers, body, or error? > > I've never felt we got the error handling quite right in > serf...*headbang* -- justin Lieven
