Re: [tbnl-devel] Odd behavior (socket leak)

On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 12:37:49PM +0200, edi@miles wrote:
I'm sitting in a train and trying to send this via my cell phone. Let's see if it works... :)
Nice :-)
I've looked at the source code of mod_lisp.c (version 2.33) and Apache (1.3.29) and I'm beginning to ask myself whether the "Keep-Socket" option makes any sense at all. What I see with my limited knowledge of Apache is the following:
You missed one key part of the process.
2. To get a socket, lisp-handler calls OpenLispSocket.
3. OpenLispSocket uses ap_psocket (using the global variable SocketPool) to get a socket from Apache.
OpenLispSocket only fetches a new socket if and only if one has not already established and is safe to use (see here): if (cfg->LispSocket) if (cfg->UnsafeLispSocket) { ap_pclosesocket(SocketPool, cfg->LispSocket); cfg->LispSocket = 0; cfg->UnsafeLispSocket = 0; } else { return cfg->LispSocket; } This is the step that bypasses the creation of a new socket. Thus, Keep-Socket does make sense. I'll continue looking at the TBNL and mod_Lisp interaction to see if I can find anything else. Thanks, Pete
participants (1)
-
pete-tbnl-dev@kazmier.com