Re: Extraneous socket read?

[Bill Stoddard]

> On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, Brian Pane wrote:
>
> > If I'm reading the code right, there's one problem with this approach: the
> > APR_INCOMPLETE_READ flag doesn't get set until after the first
> > read on a socket, so the first read on a new connection (the one that
> > usually
> > returns EAGAIN) doesn't get skipped like it should.  I _think_ the solution
> > is to set APR_INCOMPLETE_READ on any newly created socket, unless
> > you can think of cases where that would break something else.
>
> oh right.
>
> plus there's one more thing to take into account:  FreeBSD's
> SO_ACCEPTFILTER and linux's TCP_DEFER_ACCEPT ... both of which won't
> present a socket for accept until there's some data to be read.

Humm... If you use TCP_DEFER_ACCEPT, how to you handle clients connecting but not 
sending
any bytes?

Bill