DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35815>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35815





------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2005-07-22 09:04 -------
(In reply to comment #7)
> Klaus,
> 
> it should be impossible that both threads use the same connection. It is the
> sole purpose of the MTCM to ensure this. I clearly see the weird behaviour in
> the logs though. But I am still unsure how to interprete the log. So I can not
> tell what happens exactly.
> Any chance you can hack up a minimal local test case that reproduces the
> problem? I am thinking of a stress test style application. I want to make sure
> it is not a platform issue. If we can reproduce it on Windows then the problem
> is in HttpClient code. If we can only reproduce this on Solaris it is likely a
> bug in the JDK or OS.
> 
> Ortwin Glück

Ortwin,

why should it be impossible that two threads use the same connection ? Isn't it
the sence of chunking in http 1.1 that two requests are send using one
connection before the first response is received. Our http experts say that it
is allowed in http 1.1 to send two ore more requests to the server over one
connection without waiting for the resonse. The server has to send the responses
in the same sequence as the requests are sent. As I see http client uses this
feature of http 1.1. But IMO it seems that http client doesn't handle the
response correctly. In my understanding thread-1 should block thread-2 from
reading the response until thread-1 is ready with its reading.

Klaus Kopruch.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to