| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
JJR
Joined: 22 Feb 2004
Posts: 1104
|
 Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 10:51 am Post subject: |
 |
|
With the corrections...
-- testFilePath : works
-- TestUri : works
Thanks,
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kris
Joined: 27 Mar 2004
Posts: 1494
Location: South Pacific
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 11:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I will send out a Beta-3 later today with all the corrections; including the memicmp() thing for linux. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JJR
Joined: 22 Feb 2004
Posts: 1104
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I installed beta 3. It appears that the linux make does not like the makefile when it has been created on a Windows based system (probably line ends). Easy for me to fix, though, with some backspace/returns.
HttpServer doesn't segfault anymore and seems to run. But I can't test it much beyond that. It just ouputs the usual startup stuff. Not sure what I'm supposed to see. If I point my browser to 127.0.0.1, the browser shows "HTTP ERROR: 200" in big letters if dsctest is running (if dsctest isn't running, browser can't connect). I suppose this is something. Is this what I'm expected to see?
Overall, though, looks like a lot of things are getting cleaned up. 
Later,
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kris
Joined: 27 Mar 2004
Posts: 1494
Location: South Pacific
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 6:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JJR wrote: | HttpServer doesn't segfault anymore and seems to run. But I can't test it much beyond that. It just ouputs the usual startup stuff. Not sure what I'm supposed to see. If I point my browser to 127.0.0.1, the browser shows "HTTP ERROR: 200" in big letters if dsctest is running (if dsctest isn't running, browser can't connect). I suppose this is something.
John |
Yeah, that's just my weak-assed test jigs <g>
testHttpServer() does indeed toss back an error-page, but with an HTTP-OK (200) in it. It's just any old response.
If you fire up testHttpServer() and hit <CR>, it will send itself 100,000 http request before quitting. Otherwise, it just sits there looking stupid, waiting for a request from a Browser. I have my doubts as to whether that earlier segfault really is fixed; but hey! I'll be happy if it is (I simply wrapped Socket.accept() with an appropriate 'synchronized' -- it was just a hunch).
I'm afraid my test cases are not very interesting  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JJR
Joined: 22 Feb 2004
Posts: 1104
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hmmm... well when I pressed <enter> nothing else happens. Just sits there in console forever. I don't think it's doing anything unless it takes a VERY long time to finish the 100,000 iterations (without displaying anything). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kris
Joined: 27 Mar 2004
Posts: 1494
Location: South Pacific
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 6:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JJR wrote: | | Hmmm... well when I pressed <enter> nothing else happens. Just sits there in console forever. I don't think it's doing anything unless it takes a VERY long time to finish the 100,000 iterations (without displaying anything). |
It may well do, depending on your machine and how efficiently the Socket stack is implemented on the particular OS.
On a old P3-866 it completes in ~57 seconds: about 1750 requests per second, and more than half of the effort is expended within the client portion of that test.
Edit: that P3 machine is a Win2K box ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JJR
Joined: 22 Feb 2004
Posts: 1104
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, now it's seg faulting again after I press <enter> ...
I'll try a reboot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JJR
Joined: 22 Feb 2004
Posts: 1104
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 7:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think HttpServer is still pretty much a no go on Linux. CPU is 100? idle after <enter> is pressed. It's been like that for over 10 minutes on a 1.4 GHz Centrino. I wish I could see what's going on internally.
I think I'll try the win32 version on my WinXP same laptop. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kris
Joined: 27 Mar 2004
Posts: 1494
Location: South Pacific
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 13, 2004 1:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| JJR wrote: | I think HttpServer is still pretty much a no go on Linux. CPU is 100? idle after <enter> is pressed. It's been like that for over 10 minutes on a 1.4 GHz Centrino. I wish I could see what's going on internally.
I think I'll try the win32 version on my WinXP same laptop. |
CPU will certainly hit 100? for a while, but 10 minutes? That's smells to me like a spinlock for each of the worker threads. Does it do the same thing with just 1 worker thread? Also, if you wish to see what's going on, you might perhaps try printing out a "." every 64 iterations or something (in the function unittest.testClient) ?
I need to get a linux box in here ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JJR
Joined: 22 Feb 2004
Posts: 1104
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 13, 2004 2:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Um.... I think you misunderstood me... I meant that the CPU is idle. No cpu work is being done in the process at all, so far as I can see. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kris
Joined: 27 Mar 2004
Posts: 1494
Location: South Pacific
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 13, 2004 2:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| JJR wrote: | | Um.... I think you misunderstood me... I meant that the CPU is idle. No cpu work is being done in the process at all, so far as I can see. |
Yes I did, didn't I  100? *idle*. In that case, the test-client is probably stalled whilst waiting for a reply from the Server (it waits for a reply on the socket). Dsc supports socket read timeouts, and the default period is 10 seconds. I guess it is only sending one request every ten seconds then, which would explain the idle CPU and the ludicrous execution period. I imagine it runs for perhaps a hundred or so requests and then the works get all gummed up somewhere.
This is where I would add some debug printf's to both unittest.testClient() and ServerThread to try and see what's going on. I'll send you something like that if you're willing to try it out?
- Kris |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kris
Joined: 27 Mar 2004
Posts: 1494
Location: South Pacific
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 13, 2004 2:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
John, would you mind uncommenting line 942 of unittest.d, where it says Stdio.stdout.write (buf); ?
That will at least give you an idea of how far the client gets (it prints out the returned headers and HTML document). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JJR
Joined: 22 Feb 2004
Posts: 1104
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 13, 2004 2:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yep, no problem. I can test it further.
I wasn't completely clear, though. I had to manually interrupt the process with a control-c after waiting 10 mintues; that was my own human timeout period  . Otherwise it might have gone on forever. You are right, inserting some printf's would be very useful.
Later,
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kris
Joined: 27 Mar 2004
Posts: 1494
Location: South Pacific
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2004 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks primarily to John, the Socket woes have been nailed down to a simple case of running out of available socket handles. I'm working on a combination of SO_LINGER and socket.shutdown to ensure such resources are harvested asap by the OS.
- Kris |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kris
Joined: 27 Mar 2004
Posts: 1494
Location: South Pacific
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 17, 2004 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Are there any linux gurus out there who know how to increase the per-process file-handle count from the default 1024 ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
