> On 26 May 2018, at 19:47, PiBa-NL <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Thierry,
> 
> Op 25-5-2018 om 15:40 schreef Thierry FOURNIER:
>> On Fri, 18 May 2018 22:17:00 +0200
>> PiBa-NL <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Thierry,
>>> 
>>> Op 18-5-2018 om 20:00 schreef Thierry FOURNIER:
>>>> Hi Pieter,
>>>> 
>>>> Could you test the attached patch ? It seems to fix the problem, but I
>>>> have some doubts about the reliability of the patch.
>>>> 
>>>> Thierry
>>> The crash seems 'fixed' indeed.. but the lua scipt below now takes
>>> 5seconds instead of 150ms.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> PiBa-NL (Pieter)
>>> 
>>> con = core.tcp()
>>> con:connect_ssl("216.58.212.132",443) --google: 216.58.212.132
>>> request = [[GET / HTTP/1.0
>>> 
>>> ]]
>>> con:send(request)
>>> res = con:receive("*a")
>>> con:close()
>> One bug can hide another bug :-) I catch both. Could you test ?
>> 
>> If the result is positive I join also the backport for 1.6 and 1.7
>> 
>> Thierry
> 
> Thanks, seems both the hang and the 2nd uncovered task schedule issue are 
> fixed now (google website response is received/processed fast again). I've 
> done some testing, and installed the updated/patched version on my production 
> box last night. At the moment it still works properly. Activated my lua 
> healthchecker and mailer tasks and enabled 3 threads again.. Lets see how it 
> go's :), but as said for now it seems to work alright.
> 
> Does the second issue you found and fixed clear the initial 'doubts about the 
> reliability' of the first one.? Or did you have a particular possibly 
> problematic scenario in mind that i could try and check for?


Yes. On the first version, I just tried something without
confidence, and this version I read all the socket code,
so I’m confident.


> For the moment i think it is more 'reliable / stable' with the patches than 
> without. So in that regard i think they could be merged.
> 
> There seems to be a issue with tcp:settimeout() though. But ill put that in a 
> different mail-threat as im not sure its related and the issues where this 
> thread started are fixed.


I saw this problem. I tried to understand it, but without success.
The timeout applied seems to be the hardcoded default timeout. I
check this later.

BR,
Thierry

Reply via email to