From: Ken Brown <kbrown@cornell.edu>
To: Norton Allen <allen@huarp.harvard.edu>, cygwin <cygwin@cygwin.com>
Subject: Re: Unix Domain Socket Limitation?
Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 17:32:58 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <adbecb50-2e9c-622e-e152-77c28485385f@cornell.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <de5e7b33-405f-c62d-8800-674b121cd87e@huarp.harvard.edu>
On 12/6/2020 12:17 PM, Norton Allen wrote:
> On 12/5/2020 6:52 PM, Ken Brown wrote:
>> On 12/4/2020 8:51 AM, Norton Allen wrote:
>>> On 12/3/2020 8:11 PM, Ken Brown wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'm traveling at the moment and unable to do any testing, but I wonder if
>>>> you're bumping into an issue that was just discussed on the
>>>> cygwin-developers list:
>>>>
>>>> https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin-developers/2020-December/012015.html
>>>>
>>>> A different workaround is described there.
>>>>
>>>> If it's the same issue, then I don't think it will happen with the new
>>>> AF_UNIX implementation. More in a few days.
>>>>
>>> It does seem related.
>>>
>>> A work around that is working for me is to do a blocking connect() and switch
>>> to non-blocking when that completes. In my application, the connect()
>>> generally occurs once at the beginning of a run, so blocking for a few
>>> milliseconds does not impact responsiveness.
>>
>> For the record, I can confirm that (a) the problem occurs with the current
>> AF_UNIX implementation and (b) it does not occur with the new implementation
>> (on the topic/af_unix branch). With both client1 and client2, I see
>> "connect() apparently succeeded immediately" using the new implementation.
>>
>> The new implementation is not yet ready for prime time, but with any luck it
>> might be ready within a few months.
>>
> That sounds great, and exactly like the behavior under Linux. I'd certainly be
> happy to test the new implementation as it gets closer, and also happy to expand
> or improve the test apps to cover a wider range of functionality and/or
> usability (e.g. run both client and server via a fork.) Feel free to let me know
> what would be particularly useful.
Thanks. I'll take you up on that when the branch is in slightly better shape.
Ken
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-06 22:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-25 21:47 Norton Allen
2020-11-25 22:27 ` Ken Brown
[not found] ` <4260ad1b-4ab2-fa36-fd0e-7c9644560114@huarp.harvard.edu>
2020-11-26 17:13 ` Ken Brown
2020-11-30 17:19 ` Norton Allen
2020-11-30 18:14 ` Ken Brown
2020-11-30 18:26 ` Norton Allen
2020-11-30 23:19 ` Ken Brown
2020-12-01 2:14 ` Norton Allen
2020-12-01 2:22 ` Norton Allen
2020-12-02 17:30 ` Norton Allen
2020-12-04 1:11 ` Ken Brown
2020-12-04 13:51 ` Norton Allen
2020-12-05 23:52 ` Ken Brown
2020-12-06 17:17 ` Norton Allen
2020-12-06 22:32 ` Ken Brown [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=adbecb50-2e9c-622e-e152-77c28485385f@cornell.edu \
--to=kbrown@cornell.edu \
--cc=allen@huarp.harvard.edu \
--cc=cygwin@cygwin.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).