> > To my great surprise, the close(socket) operation > > took EXTREMELY long. It > > took 0.11 second (CPU usage was low), while this > > operation under MinGW 1.1 > > on the same machine took only 0.00019 second. On > > another Linux machine, > > close took 0.000043 second. > > A solution may be in calling shutdown() if not called before by the application before calling closesocket().
I have tried like this with success.
-- without shutdown() ----
accept: 0.000000
recv: 0.011112
send: 0.000069
shutdown: 0.000000
close: 0.328966
-- with shutdown(s,SHUT_WR) ----
accept: 0.000000
recv: 0.012169
send: 0.000089
shutdown: 0.000112
close: 0.000105
Question: Does adding shutdown make the following code
obsolate ? (I have assumed so in my appended patch)
fhandler_socket::close()
---old---
/* HACK to allow a graceful shutdown even if shutdown()
hasn't been
called by the application. Note that this isn't the
ultimate
solution but it helps in many cases. */
struct linger linger;
linger.l_onoff = 1;
linger.l_linger = 240; /* seconds. default 2MSL value
according to MSDN. */
setsockopt (get_socket (), SOL_SOCKET, SO_LINGER,
(const char *)&linger, sizeof linger);
--new----
if (!saw_shutdown_read () && !saw_shutdown_write ())
shutdown(get_socket (),SD_BOTH);
---------
Any comments to this ? What about win95 and other os. Could
there be any problems ?
Regards
Ralf
shutdown.patch
Description: Binary data
shutdown.ChangeLog
Description: Binary data
-- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
