"Sven Van Caekenberghe"<[email protected]> wrote: > Each #acceptWaitTimeout seconds, 'Wait for accept timed out' is printed on > the log and another accept/wait starts. This looping improves liveliness and > responsiveness to other events.
Given that accept is generally done on the server side, usually in a background process, I have to say I'd be inclined to side with Wilhelm on this one. I don't see much that the server can do than go back into another accept loop. You can't predict how long will it take for the next client to connect, so a timeout isn't a sign of an issue. So I don't see much use for timeout on accept. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "improving liveliness". If the implementation needs to get out of accept to let other processes respond to events, then I wouldn't call that a feature. But these are really more philosophical points. In practice, wrapping a loop around an accept timeout isn't a big deal either, as long as it works as needed.
