The following comment has been added to this issue:
Author: Alan Cabrera
Created: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 2:36 PM
Body:
I agree, fail "goes up" and tearDown "goes down". I'm not entirely comfortable
with protocols calling each other directly and much prefer an IOC type
mechanism but, I'm open to discussion.
The clearlinks method is dlearly dodgy; I must have been on crack when I put it
in. I think that it may be an aritifact of me using, gasp, clone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
View this comment:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-373?page=comments#action_53965
---------------------------------------------------------------------
View the issue:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-373
Here is an overview of the issue:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: GERONIMO-373
Summary: Percolate errors from SocketProtocol up the stack
Type: Improvement
Status: Unassigned
Priority: Major
Project: Apache Geronimo
Components:
general
Assignee:
Reporter: David Farb
Created: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 9:42 AM
Updated: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 2:36 PM
Environment: All environments
Description:
o.a.g.network.protocol.SocketProtocol does not percolate a client error or
exception up the protocol stack when the client disconnects.
When serviceRead in SocketProtocol gets an IOException or some other error, the
socketChannel is closed, but the up protocol is not informed.
Calling the teardown method of the up protocol is probably not an appropriate
way to handle these exceptions. The teardown method should be called by the
creator of the protocol stack. Instead, the exception/error should percolate up
the protocol stack to the creator (via some sort of callback mechanism) which
should then remove the stack and associated information from the server
environment.
Either a new method reserved for this could be defined in the Protocol
interface (up.handleException(Throwable t)) or sending a null, empty or
specially marked packet via up.sendUp(UpPacket upPacket) could be implemented.
Since in most cases the server is waiting for a client response, if the client
goes away, server components need to be informed of this fact so the server
side objects can be cleaned up. There is usually no way to recover these
objects, hence they are a memory leak.
I would be happy to submit a fix for this, but I would appreciate feedback on
the most appropriate way to do it.
Thanks
David Farb
---------------------------------------------------------------------
JIRA INFORMATION:
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
If you want more information on JIRA, or have a bug to report see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
