Re: Replication server timeout patch

On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Why does internal_flush_if_writable compute bufptr differently from
>> internal_flush?  And shouldn't it be static?
>>
>> It seems to me that this ought to be refactored so that you don't
>> duplicate so much code.  Maybe static int internal_flush(bool
>> nonblocking).
>>
>> I don't think that the while (bufptr < bufend) loop needs to contain
>> the code to set and clear the nonblocking state.  You could do the
>> whole loop with nonblocking mode turned on and then reenable it just
>> once at the end.  Besides possibly being clearer, that would be more
>> efficient and leave less room for unexpected failures.
>
> All these comments seem to make sense. Will fix. Thanks!

Done. I attached the updated patch.

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center