 |
 |
That would be a fairly big change in the server. From the servers perspective, a kXR_wait is fair simpler to handle because it'stateless. A kXR_waitresp if more complicated because it has to keep state. The current endsess path has no provision to keep state so that would have to be added. I think Michal found it rather easy to fix the client to properly handle the various return cases for endsess. Andy On Tue, 27 Mar 2018, Lukasz Janyst wrote: > @abh3 Out of curiosity, would it be possible for the server to send `kXR_waitresp` instead `kXR_wait`? It would alleviate Eric's concerns about retry latency due to the wait time overestimation and the client-side implementation would be simpler. > > -- > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: > https://github.com/xrootd/xrootd/issues/673#issuecomment-376564635 -- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/xrootd/xrootd/issues/673#issuecomment-376566732 ######################################################################## Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-DEV list, click the following link: https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-DEV&A=1