We are experiencing some problems with persistent sockets (the kind you get from pfsockopen) and I can't help but conclude that some semantic changes are needed to make them dependable. (That is, assuming anyone cares whether they are dependable.)
The problem is that, in practice, a persistent socket can be handed from one script to the next in virtually any state. If one script begins some transaction on a pfsocket, it's not in an "idle" state that can be handed to another script until the transaction is completely done. For example, if you do an HTTP GET on a pfsocket (assuming Keep-Alive), no other script should be able to obtain that socket until the reply has been received and fully consumed by the first script. But if the first script failed to do that for any reason, the next script that comes along receives the socket in a state that it can't use. It may post it's own HTTP "GET" and then receive the reply from the last script's uncompleted GET. And after that, the next script STILL receives a socket in a bad state, ad infinitum. ..and I'll add that this happens to us on a weekly basis. Windows Server 2003, IIS 6, PHP 5.2.5, isapi. If it's possible for a script to detect that it's received a socket in a non-idle state, it should be allowed to close it (really, truly close it), at the very least to remove it from the pool of persistent sockets to the given resource. But unless I've missed something, it's not possible to *really* close a pfsocket. It just gets returned to the resource pool, in whatever sorry state it's in. Here's the big part: I was thinking that a semantic change to persistent sockets might make it easier for scripts to work "correctly" without bothering them too much. The change is this: If a script doesn't "fclose" it's "pfsockopen"ed socket, it gets closed *for real* when the script ends. I suggest this because I think it would make scripts "just work" in the presence of failures, even if the script coder doesn't completely understand the principle; it makes the transaction boundaries "automatic". The down side is that, if a script forgets the fclose, things work but it doesn't recycle sockets, it makes new ones all the time. The other down side is that for old scripts that never had an fclose in them, they stop getting recycled pfsockets until the fclose is added. I'm going to do *something* about this myself, anyway. I'd really like it if a solution were adopted into the main code base.
