time-wait

Port Stuck in Time_Wait

删除回忆录丶 提交于 2019-12-10 15:59:27
问题 I have a TCP Tunnel in C#. I need to open and close the tunnel which is my app between a server and a client. I'm using this to close the data connection to test out another app. I have to use particular ports. On the second, third, nth connection depending on how long I wait to reconnect, I receive a 10048 error code - "Address already in use" when binding my socket. When closing the sockets, I do perform ShutDown.Both and Close in hopes of clearing out the ports, but when I do a netstat in

Need a better wait solution

只愿长相守 提交于 2019-12-10 09:39:44
问题 Recently I have been writing a program in C++ that pings three different websites and then depending on pass or fail it will wait 5 minutes or 30 seconds before it tries again. Currently I have been using the ctime library and the following function to process my waiting. However, according to my CPU meter this is an unacceptable solution. void wait (int seconds) { clock_t endwait; endwait = clock () + seconds * CLOCKS_PER_SEC; while (clock () < endwait) {} } The reason why this solution is

tcp connection in TIME_WAIT won't allow reconnect, java

梦想与她 提交于 2019-12-08 12:42:12
问题 After making a tcp connection to a server, I close my linux application and Socket.close() is called. Checking netstat -pant, I see the connection is in TIME_WAIT status. This prevents me from making an immediate connection back to the server since I'm using the same port to connect from. Instead, I have to wait for the connection to timeout of the TIME_WAIT status before I can reconnect again. I've played around -without luck- with the socket methods: set_so_timeout(), set_keepalive(), set

What's the difference between TIME-WAIT Assassination and SO_REUSEADDR

一个人想着一个人 提交于 2019-12-08 08:32:05
问题 I was reading about using the SO_LINGER socket option to intentionally 'assassinate' the time-wait state by setting the linger time to zero. The author of the book then goes on to say we should never do this and in general that we should never interfere with the time-wait state. He then immediately recommends using the SO_REUSEADDR option to bypass the time-wait state. My question is, what's the difference? In both cases you're prematurely terminating the time-wait state and taking the risk

Wait until the webpage loads in Scrapy

…衆ロ難τιáo~ 提交于 2019-12-06 07:47:10
I am using scrapy script to load URL using "yield". MyUrl = "www.example.com" request = Request(MyUrl, callback=self.mydetail) yield request def mydetail(self, response): item['Description'] = response.xpath(".//table[@class='list']//text()").extract() return item The URL seems to take minimum 5 seconds to load. So I want Scrapy to wait for some time to load the entire text in item['Description']. I tried "DOWNLOAD_DELAY" in settings.py but no use. yavalvas Make a brief view on firebug or another tool to capture responses for Ajax requests, which were made by javascript code. You are able to

How I can use the UpdateProgress Control for show a waittime

烈酒焚心 提交于 2019-12-06 06:02:52
问题 I have a ASP.NET Application with a ListView . I get Data from the Active Directory and now I want a wait symbol for the time if the ListVew is building. I thought I use a UpdateProgress Control from Ajax Control toolkit. But I don't know how I can use it if I click on a Button and the wait symbol (for example a gif) close if the ListView is finish. :( My CS file: protected void btnBenutzerSuchen_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { //If I click on this Button the gif must start try { ... //

How I can use the UpdateProgress Control for show a waittime

生来就可爱ヽ(ⅴ<●) 提交于 2019-12-04 09:45:42
I have a ASP.NET Application with a ListView . I get Data from the Active Directory and now I want a wait symbol for the time if the ListVew is building. I thought I use a UpdateProgress Control from Ajax Control toolkit. But I don't know how I can use it if I click on a Button and the wait symbol (for example a gif) close if the ListView is finish. :( My CS file: protected void btnBenutzerSuchen_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { //If I click on this Button the gif must start try { ... // my ListView get data this.myListView.DataSource = dv; this.myListView.DataBind(); ... } catch (Exception

Go client program generates a lot a sockets in TIME_WAIT state

不想你离开。 提交于 2019-11-27 04:42:23
I have a Go program that generates a lot of HTTP requests from multiple goroutines. after running for a while, the program spits out an error: connect: cannot assign requested address. When checking with netstat , I get a high number (28229) of connections in TIME_WAIT . The high number of TIME_WAIT sockets happens when I the number of goroutines is 3 and is severe enough to cause a crash when it is 5. I run Ubuntu 14.4 under docker and go version 1.7 This is the Go program. package main import ( "io/ioutil" "log" "net/http" "sync" ) var wg sync.WaitGroup var url="http://172.17.0.9:3000/";

Difference between webdriver.get() and webdriver.navigate()

谁说我不能喝 提交于 2019-11-27 03:11:00
What is the difference between get() and navigate() methods? Does any of this or maybe another method waits for page content to load? What do I really need is something like selenium s 1.0 WaitForPageToLoad but for using via webdriver`. Any suggestions? Navigating The first thing you’ll want to do with WebDriver is navigate to a page. The normal way to do this is by calling get : driver.get("http://www.google.com"); WebDriver will wait until the page has fully loaded (that is, the onload event has fired) before returning control to your test or script. It’s worth noting that if your page uses

What is the cost of many TIME_WAIT on the server side?

江枫思渺然 提交于 2019-11-26 19:28:44
Let's assume there is a client that makes a lot of short-living connections to a server. If the client closes the connection, there will be many ports in TIME_WAIT state on the client side. Since the client runs out of local ports, it becomes impossible to make a new connection attempt quickly. If the server closes the connection, I will see many TIME_WAIT s on the server side. However, does this do any harm? The client (or other clients) can keep making connection attempts since it never runs out of local ports, and the number of TIME_WAIT state will increase on the server side. What happens