freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: FreeTDS Development Group
List archive
- From: "ZIGLIO, Frediano, VF-IT" <Frediano.Ziglio AT vodafone.com>
- To: "FreeTDS Development Group" <freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [freetds] removing a todo
- Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 09:47:32 +0100
>
> In net.c, there is this question about sendto(2) on a UDP port:
>
> /* TODO is there a way to see if server reply with an ICMP (port not
> available) ?? */
>
>
> There is not. Well, there is, but it is extremely difficult
> and complex,
> taking up a whole chapter in Stevens's Unix Network Programming.
> Certainly it's not worth it.
>
The problem is understanding if server cannot reply to our request. If
server reply that port is closed is useless to repeat loop 16 times.
I think that a better change would be to change comment to a
/* There is no easy way to detect if port is closed so we always try to
get a reply from server 16 times */
You know, my memory is not so good so I bet that some years later I will
ask me the same question...
I think that removing tdserror call is not so good.
tds7_get_instance_port is called by tds_connect and if is not able to
get port is just return without any notice to library. We can't
dinstinguish between "server is not available" and "timeout" so I
notified a timeout. I agree that notifying a timeout on every loop is
not correct but at least when you finish loop and port is not valid
would be helpful.
freddy77
-
[freetds] removing a todo,
James K. Lowden, 01/06/2007
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
-
Re: [freetds] removing a todo,
ZIGLIO, Frediano, VF-IT, 01/08/2007
- Re: [freetds] removing a todo, James K. Lowden, 01/08/2007
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.