On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 09:53:27 +0100 "Maarten Bosteels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 5, 2008 9:17 AM, Julien Vermillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:52:37 -0700 > > Jeff Genender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > great question..Im interested in this as well. > > > > > > Jeff > > > > > > Sangjin Lee wrote: > > > > I had a quick question on the connect timeout... > > > > The connect timeout supplied to connectors is in the unit of > > > > seconds, and it appears the minimum value you can use is 1 > > > > second ( AbstractIoConnector.setConnectTimeout() in the case of > > > > the trunk). Is this by design? I can see cases where one needs > > > > to have a shorter connect timeout, but it seems it is not > > > > possible today. One solution might be to use > > > > ConnectFuture.join() with a timeout, but that works only if you > > > > want to block until it times out... > > > > > > > > It also seems that this minimum timeout value is somewhat tied > > > > to the timeout value used in the select() loop in the > > > > connector, which is hard coded to be 1 second. Would it be a > > > > good idea to support connect timeout values in milliseconds, > > > > and make it shorter than 1 second? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Sangjin > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > Apparently it's doable, the timeout value is multiplicated by 1000 > > before being placed in the ConnectionRequest deadline. > > As far I understand it, it's not a big deal but an API change. > > > +1 for sub-second timeout values > And I think it's best to change the API now, before cutting 2.0-M1 > How about adding a java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit parameter to > setConnectTimeout() ? > > Maarten > > > > > > Julien > > I think specifying a millisecond param is enough, nobody will pass hour/day/month/picosecond based timeout values. It'll complexify the API for no much gain. Julien
