On Sat, 2009-02-21 at 12:59 -0500, Martin Peach wrote:
> Hi Roman,
> I think it probably comes down to the code not checking for all possible
> error conditions.
cool, if it would be as simple as that.
> Under udp you can send as much as you like to
> nonexistent receivers but tcp needs an active connection.
> Most likely the code is just assuming that everything is working properly.
> It sounds as though data being sent to a client whose connection has
> just dropped but before it has timed out, will go into nevernever land
> and the thread will hang.
where is neverneverland? i mean, in tcp protocol, the receiver has to
confirm, that it received the messages, so i guess, the sender needs to
keep all the messages, that were sent to the vanished client, but were
never confirmed, right?
> It would be nice to have a setup that could reliably reproduce the bug,
> then it would be much easier to fix. Probably having 2 machines
> connected and pulling the cable out of one at the right moment should do it.
> Anyway I'll stop speculating now and have a look at the code...
let me try some test setups, though i think one needs to have at least
two computers in order to trigger the problem. it would be just awesome,
if this long-standing issue could be fixed.
roman
___________________________________________________________
Der frühe Vogel fängt den Wurm. Hier gelangen Sie zum neuen Yahoo! Mail:
http://mail.yahoo.de
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
