"Steve Holden" <s...@hol.eb.com> wrote: > > My previous reply assumed you are running some UNIX-like operating > system. If you are on Windows then Jean-Paul's advice stands, as Windows > *does* allow several processes to listen on the same port and randomly > delivers incoming connections to one of the listening processes. > > I believe this is because Microsoft failed to understand the original > meaning of SO_REUSEADDR for their early TCP implementations, and > persisted with this ghastly error in the name of backwards > compatibility, justifying it by suggesting that listener pools could be > created. Or some such nonsense. Perhaps someone with more insight into > the development process could comment. It seems to me it's completely > bizarre. > > However, under Windows 2000 and later you should find there's an > SO_EXCLUSIVEADDRUSE flag which you can use to ensure a single listener - > see http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms740621(VS.85).aspx. No > need for separate locks. >
Thanks Steve - I am not the OP, I was just curious as to why Jean-Paul was saying what he did - so the only reason I have not been bitten on windoze yet must be either because I am lucky, or because my server side stuff is linux and there is the occasional windows client. So I don't really listen on windows. "a pool of listeners" - just think of the fun one can have trying to keep state between them - would be a marvellous job if someone else is paying top dollar by the hour - I can just see the team growing as the need for new specialists are discovered as one goes along. :-) - Hendrik -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
