Checking for errors before recv() called - c++

Question

In got the following problem:
I made a server which is able to handle multiple connection by using select(). But select returns a client(index of FD_SET) also if the socket just got an error like "client disconnect" or whatever.
Is it possible to check a socket without calling recv(). Because to receive I need to get a buffer out of my "BufferPool"
Sample code:
int ret = recv(client, buffer_pool->get(), BUFFER_SIZE, 0);
if(ret == -1) ... // something went wrong
Well then I have to release the buffer again, and it was pretty much a waste of one buffer in my pool. (for a short time)
So isn't it possible to check the socket without calling recv()

Answer 1

I am not sure about the Windows, but using getsockopt() works like a charm on POSIX-compliant systems. Though before you use it - make sure that getting your buffer from the pool is more expensive than making an extra system call. Here is a code snippet:
int my_get_socket_error(int fd)
{
int err_code;
socklen_t len = sizeof(err_code);
if (getsockopt(fd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_ERROR, &err_code, &len) != 0)
err_code = errno;
else
errno = err_code;
return err_code;
}
UPDATE:
According to this document, it seems like Windows supports it too.

Answer 2

No, there is no way to avoid the recv() call. If select() reports that the socket is readable, then you have to read from the socket to determine its new state. If the client disconnected gracefully, recv() will return 0, not -1. If you do not want to waste a pooled buffer, then you will have to read into a temporary local buffer first, and then if recv() returns any data, you can retrieve a pooled buffer and copy the read data into it.

Answer 3

Calling recv and similar function does not work directly with networking devices or something similar.
When you send or receive data, all you do is questioning OS for available data, or to put data in queue for sending. Then OS will do the other job when your code is already went further.
That is why you receive errors after next call of socket function that will "contact" OS networking layers.
It is normal to get errors on that point, and you have to deal with them.
But to prevent blocking sockets and wasting buffers, check out online techniques of implementing or ready libraries that gives you asynchronous way of working with sockets, that way you don't need to define anything before socket will trigger receive callback function where you have to do actual receiving.
As well, it is not good technique to receive big amount of data in one go, because you will face problems with merged or broken apart data through TCP layer, because it is stream based layer. It is recommended to have header in you packets (few bytes) and receive them, that way you don't need pull for header, but only after header you want to read rest of message based on length provided in header. This is just possible example.

Answer 4

After some minutes of work and your help I just receive 1byte before receiving the full amount:
SOCKET client = ...;
char temp = 0x00;
int len = recv(client, &temp, 1, 0);
if(len == 0)
{
// .. client error handling
return;
}
char* buffer = m_memory_pool->Get();
len = recv(client, buffer + 1, m_memory_pool->buffer_size() - 1, 0);
buffer[0] = temp;
// data handling

Answer 5

I tried also to set a timeout for recv() but seems that under Windows it does not work, this is my code:
...
long timeout_ms = 10;
struct timeval interval = {timeout_ms / 1000, (timeout_ms % 1000) * 1000};
if (interval.tv_sec < 0 || (interval.tv_sec == 0 && interval.tv_usec <= 0))
{
interval.tv_sec = 0;
interval.tv_usec = 10000;
}
setsockopt(s_sktIx, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVTIMEO, (char *)&interval, sizeof(struct timeval));
...