List:Internals« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Vladimir Shebordaev Date:August 19 2009 9:40pm
Subject:Re: why is the alarm thread used instead of SO_SNDTIMEO and
SO_RCVTIMEO
View as plain text  
Hi,

I'm not quite deep into the history but as far as I can see vio layer
does honor those socket options on the platforms they are implemented
and expected to be working. Btw, POSIX does not require thes options
to be settable.

Regards,
Vladimir



2009/8/20 MARK CALLAGHAN <mdcallag@stripped>:
> I describe how I think read/write is done for sockets in mysqld.
> http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=122655300932
>
> Can someone explain the history of this code? That is, why was the
> alarm thread used for read/write timeouts rather than
> SO_SNDTIMEO/SO_RCVTIMEO?
>
> Has anyone had success defining NO_ALARM so that SO_SNDTIMEO and
> SO_RCVTIMEO are used? I will soon try that myself. Well, I assume that
> NO_ALARM will do that but I have to look at the preprocessor output as
> the code in question is full of ifdefs.
>
> --
> Mark Callaghan
> mdcallag@stripped
>
> --
> MySQL Internals Mailing List
> For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/internals
> To unsubscribe:    http://lists.mysql.com/internals?unsub=1
>
>
Thread
why is the alarm thread used instead of SO_SNDTIMEO and SO_RCVTIMEOMARK CALLAGHAN19 Aug
  • Re: why is the alarm thread used instead of SO_SNDTIMEO and SO_RCVTIMEOKonstantin Osipov19 Aug
  • Re: why is the alarm thread used instead of SO_SNDTIMEO and SO_RCVTIMEOVladimir Shebordaev19 Aug
    • Re: why is the alarm thread used instead of SO_SNDTIMEO and SO_RCVTIMEOKonstantin Osipov20 Aug