From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 25 05:34:59 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAFE716A41F for ; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 05:34:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mayank@microsoft.com) Received: from mail-sin1.microsoft.com (mail-sin1.microsoft.com [207.46.50.72]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 140FA43D4C for ; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 05:34:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mayank@microsoft.com) Received: from APS-MSG-01.southpacific.corp.microsoft.com ([157.60.218.52]) by mail-sin1.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 25 Nov 2005 14:34:57 +0900 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 13:34:56 +0800 Message-ID: <3A5384BC2FBA4C488865F2275A036BFF040B284E@APS-MSG-01.southpacific.corp.microsoft.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: What is the correct behaviour for local socket(AF_UNIX) in the following scenario? thread-index: AcXxIgHQPkjcHToxTGCqbr9PZGeVDAAX63Bg From: "Mayank Kumar" To: "Joseph Koshy" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Nov 2005 05:34:57.0603 (UTC) FILETIME=[F8BB5930:01C5F181] Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: RE: What is the correct behaviour for local socket(AF_UNIX) in the following scenario? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 05:34:59 -0000 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