On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 1:48 PM, David Timothy Strauss <da...@davidstrauss.net> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 6:23 AM, Shawn Landden <sh...@churchofgit.com> wrote: >> I was worried that the fact that we never accept() the socket when using >> distribute (now I am convinced we shouldn't use it otherwise) > > I'm not sure what you mean here. Distribute-style functionality is > absolutely useful with Accept=true (to cap the number of simultaneous > connections) Are you sure applications can handle the extra file descriptor of passing both the sockfd and the acceptfd in this case? I don't see why they wouldn't just do the accept() themselves?
Can you explain what you mean here, and how it differs from the existing MaxConnections. > as well as Accept=false (to allow running of a process > pool of self-accepting, long-running workers). > >> would cause it to trigger multiple times for only one incoming connection, >> if the spawned thread never entered accept() (or we raced it), >> but reading this thread makes me think I don't fully understand the >> semantics of EPOLLET. > > There are some decent examples on the man page: > http://linux.die.net/man/7/epoll Yeah I had read that, and seen it in the kernel source. I am just confused and need to think about it some more. -Shawn _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel