Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tomas Berndtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > After it tries again, it always gets error from recv() for some reason > > that I don't know. I also don't understand why errno is set to ENOTTY > > at this point, that makes no sense at all. > > Are you sure it is set? Try setting errno=0 just before recv() (inside > the retry loop). Maybe recv() is neglecting to set it in this case.
Indeed you were right in this. But, if I added -D_REENTRANT to the Makefile for libpq, it started to set it. If libpq should be thread safe, I believe it should be compiled with -D_REENTRANT. When I did this, recv still returns error, but now sets errno to EAGAIN, so pqReadData() returns 1, giving the same result as removing the if-statement that does the try again thing. > > By skipping the trying again if-statement, pqReadData() will always > > return proper data, and let the calling function deal with the fact > > that there is more data to be read. > > I have no confidence in this. If the calling function comes back for > more data, why wouldn't the recv() fail the same way? A few more > instructions in between shouldn't change its behavior, one would think. No, I agree it sounds strange. I still haven't figured out why recv fails after the goto, but not when calling the function again. Tomas ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
