Draft
Conversation
This factor out the inner "connect to this specific address" part of the current server_connect into its own function. As a nice side-benefit, the connection loops now become simple enough to keep them separate, making it much easier to read.
This allows us to reconnect to the same server without having to perform hostname lookups etc again.
Contributor
|
I'm down with enabling a reconnect without name resolution in the existing tcp sockets implementation, so this PR conceptually seems like an improvement. But I'd personally prefer having this API available on top of what's in this PR: I think it's a reasonable compromise, though I'm not super committed to the |
Member
Author
|
I marked this as a draft until we've settled on a decision for #97, as it might get a bit in the way for how we want to do things there. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is the
sync_tcp_reconnect()proposal I made for #97. It's probably not perfect, but it seems to work.