On Mon, 2002-02-18 at 17:53, Martin Pool wrote: > On 18 Feb 2002, Wayne Davison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Martin Pool wrote: > > > Why the sleep() call? > > I guess the point is that the fork() probably failed because the > server is overloaded, and therefore there is no point trying to accept > another connection again immediately. I just wanted to check this was > the reason.
Exactly. I got the idea from Postfix. Upon encountering resource exhaustion, back off. This also has the nice property of preventing the log files from getting filled easily. > > Also, why close(fd) twice? Well, it's best to close the fd as soon as we can, to free resources. The second close should just fail harmlessly. We could add a "continue;" after the sleep if you think it's a problem.
