Messages in this thread | | | From | kuznet@ms2 ... | Subject | Re: NONBLOCKing close blocks in named | Date | Sat, 18 Sep 1999 17:28:33 +0400 (MSK DST) |
| |
Hello!
> Should have mentioned that I checked that. According to the strace, > SO_LINGER hasn't been set or unset on that file descriptor (curiously, it > had been set on a previous socket from the same IP and with the same file > descriptor number).
Check again, bind-8.x.x (unlike bind-4.x.x) really has this weird bug, setting linger in main executon thread.
> Even where the LINGER was set (elsewhere in the code) it was set to 120 > (units - seconds? - claims to be hundreths of seconds in the setsockopt > man page but I think that's wrong). In the problem that I demonstrated, > close took 11 minutes to return!
Until recently linux 2.2 ignored finite linger value, translating it to infinite one. It is fixed though it is wrong: finite linger values are non-sense: bind dead for 120 seconds is buggy in the same extent. Actually, almost any application trying to set finite linger value is broken.
> I'm tempted to comment out the only SO_LINGER entry in BIND (it doesn't > seem to be needed) to see it help - I'm not sure.
It will help and it is necessary to make bind-8 working.
Alexey Kuznetsov
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |