[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       imap
Subject:    re: SELECT and possible race condition?
From:       Mark Crispin <MRC () Panda ! COM>
Date:       1993-12-29 21:28:54
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wed, 29 Dec 93 21:01:40 GMT, A.Grant@ucs.cam.ac.uk wrote:
> Suppose I get unsolicited data
>
>   * 3 EXISTS
>
> Which mailbox does this refer to, if I have just sent off a SELECT?

It refers to the new mailbox.  If a server implementation sends an EXISTS for
the previous mailbox, it's a server bug.  The c-client based server might have
this bug (failing to go silent on update events during closing); if it does,
I'll fix it.

> How do I know if it relates to the new mailbox or is an asynchronous
> update about the old one?  Is there a race condition here?

This is one of two problem with the whole notion of asynchronous responses in
IMAP; the other being the flow control problem.  IMAP is not asynchronous;
there is a definite command/response interaction.  What IMAP does have is the
ability for other things to happen in a response besides what is strictly
necessary to answer the command.

> (Incidentally, it would be helpful if the RFC had section or even
> paragraph numbers like others do.)

Suggestion noted.

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]