"killtime" parameter patch ?
Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE
Wed May 16 14:11:01 MDT 2012
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 09:44:06AM -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> What is really interesting is that we ignore errors from
> our own send_keepalive() code.
> All that happens if sending a keepalive fails from server
> to client is that we log it and stop sending them.
> Is that correct ? If we fail in sending a keepalive shouldn't
> we terminate in the same way as in the deadtime code ?
Yes, it is correct I think. I don't think at writev(2) time
a TCP socket can reliably detect that it will not be able to
ship the data for whatever reason. So I can not imagine it
to return a reliable error message. What will happen though
is that the keepalive packet will trigger a much faster
timeout or a RST from the client which in turn will make the
next poll/recv fail.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 Göttingen
phone: +49-551-370000-0, fax: +49-551-370000-9
AG Göttingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen
http://www.sernet.de, mailto:kontakt at sernet.de
More information about the samba-technical