So you think that it's ok for comm_coonect_addr() to return COMM_OK if it was called before the appropriate select() notification. Am I right?
On Wed, 2012-09-05 at 08:30 -0600, Alex Rousskov wrote: > On 09/05/2012 03:32 AM, Alexander Komyagin wrote: > > On Tue, 2012-09-04 at 09:16 -0600, Alex Rousskov wrote: > > >> Again, I hope that this trick is not needed to solve your problem, and I > >> am worried that it will cause more/different problems elsewhere. I would > >> recommend fixing CommOpener instead. If _that_ is not sufficient, we can > >> discuss appropriate low-level enhancements. > > > > Both things shall be fixed, IMHO. > > If double-connect is not needed, we should not introduce it. AFAICT, > double-connect is an attempt to cope with a bug in higher-level code. We > should fix that bug and see if that is sufficient. If it is not > sufficient, we should evaluate why and only then add appropriate > low-level code if needed. > > The primary goal here is to fix the underlying issue, not just to find a > workaround (which you have already provided). > > > Thank you, > > Alex. > -- Best wishes, Alexander Komyagin
