By 'unlockAccept' you mean the socket connection made to the acceptor to force the accept() to unblock ? How are you getting the socket accept() to return, my understanding was that close() or thread interrupt don't work in all cases/VMs.
Costin On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi > > Did some testing and removing unlockAccept works equally > fine (and in some circumstances pause/continue and even shutdown is much > faster). > Using a simple socket close on stop/destroy and monitoring > for pause 'after' acceptSocket() by not handling single > connection received after pause eliminates the need for > unlockAccept entirely. > It also fixes various issues with disappearing network > stack, link-local addresses, and various hang-outs on > shutdown/pause. > > > Any objections that I commit that to trunk? > AFAICT this is not covered by any spec and the only > change is that a single connection that could get accepted > during pause phase can receive ECONNRESET instead ECONNREFUSED > in case pause continues beyond client socket timeout. > > > Regards > -- > ^TM > > ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.**org<dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org > >
