err, "not completely sure"
On Jan 24, 2008 3:01 PM, Dan Hulme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Although that patch does seem to work, I'm completely sure it ever
> frees the mio struct. Thus, I think the zeroing the event method is
> better.
>
> -Dan
>
>
> On Jan 24, 2008 2:15 PM, Dan Hulme <[EMAIL P
Although that patch does seem to work, I'm completely sure it ever
frees the mio struct. Thus, I think the zeroing the event method is
better.
-Dan
On Jan 24, 2008 2:15 PM, Dan Hulme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, after looking closer, it does not appear to reuse sockets at all,
> but reuses t
Ok, after looking closer, it does not appear to reuse sockets at all,
but reuses the mio structure. The structure is pretty simple and was
not remembering the old file descriptor, so I just looked at how it
differed (after being used once) from a completely new one. What I
noticed was that the "r
I had forgotten, but this is the case. Here is confirmation:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms740481(VS.85).aspx
> An application should not rely on being able to reuse a socket after it has
> been shut down.
> In particular, a Windows Sockets provider is not required to support the us
On Jan 24, 2008 2:14 AM, Dan Hulme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This function appears to try to append the old closed socket to a
> linked list of free sockets. When the new connection tries to use
> this socket, it has trouble. Once the next connection connects,
> however, it will not use that
On Śr, 2008-01-23 at 16:14 -0800, Dan Hulme wrote:
> Have tracked the problem down to this point:
>
Great! :-)
Many thanks for the information.
I contacted ONO and he will look into that.
--
/\_./o__ Tomasz Sterna
(/^/(_^^' http://www.xiaoka.com/
._.(_.)_ im:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
