Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 13:34:56 +0800 From: "Mayank Kumar" <mayank@microsoft.com> To: "Joseph Koshy" <joseph.koshy@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: RE: What is the correct behaviour for local socket(AF_UNIX) in the following scenario? Message-ID: <3A5384BC2FBA4C488865F2275A036BFF040B284E@APS-MSG-01.southpacific.corp.microsoft.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I have not measured this leak. This is just my feeling that the behaviour would be like this. If the behavior is not this way, then how do we take account of this in FREEBSD is what I want to know.=20 I mean, if p1 has written data and exits and there is no p1 to read it, then what happens to the data written by p1. Regards Mayank -----Original Message----- From: Joseph Koshy [mailto:joseph.koshy@gmail.com]=20 Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2005 11:38 PM To: Mayank Kumar Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What is the correct behaviour for local socket(AF_UNIX) in the following scenario? > Now if there is no process p2 to read the data written by process p1=20 > from the same localsocket, then this has resulted in a huge memory=20 > leak on a FreeBSD system. How are you measuring the 'leak', and which version of FreeBSD are you using? -- FreeBSD Volunteer, http://people.freebsd.org/~jkoshy
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3A5384BC2FBA4C488865F2275A036BFF040B284E>