On 6/1/05, Joe Orton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 04:15:02PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-06-01 16:15 ------- > > I don't have any patches and/or tested code. I was hoping you'd chime in ;) > > > > I concur on checking for rv != APR_EOF. > > > > For core_output_filter, looks like there are two paths, based on what we > > originally found out for the file length (before truncation): > > > > a) big enough for sendfile > > > > not improved by file-bucket-read fix; I suspect sendfile caller will loop > > since > > we won't make any progress when calling sendfile (0 bytes written) > > incidentally, I've seen a few loopers with sendfile enabled on HP-UX; > > supposedly > > that is NOT due to truncated file but instead something happening in network > > layer; catching this no-progress-made scenario would exit the loop on the > > HP-UX > > scenario as well > > Ah, interesting. The logic is there to return APR_EOF to the caller for > the "made no progress" case for some of the implementations. Looks like > the HP-UX, Solaris and possibly AIX implementations are missing it > though.
wow! now to find a little time to play with this, HP-UX first of all!
