DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27589] - MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown
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=27589. 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=27589 MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-29 09:27 --- Thanks. It seems that the nightly builds are done on the HEAD only, so I guess I have to retrieve the source from CVS and build myself. Or is there any plan to have nightly builds for 2.0 support also? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27589] - MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown
Yes, unfortunately the nightly builds are from HEAD. I'm not sure if we can create both 2.0 and HEAD nightly builds. Anyone know more about this? Mike On Mar 29, 2004, at 4:27 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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=27589. 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=27589 MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-29 09:27 --- Thanks. It seems that the nightly builds are done on the HEAD only, so I guess I have to retrieve the source from CVS and build myself. Or is there any plan to have nightly builds for 2.0 support also? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27589] - MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown
Mike, I believe the only way to find this out is to approach the infrastructure folks ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Oleg On Mon, 2004-03-29 at 15:30, Michael Becke wrote: Yes, unfortunately the nightly builds are from HEAD. I'm not sure if we can create both 2.0 and HEAD nightly builds. Anyone know more about this? Mike On Mar 29, 2004, at 4:27 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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=27589. 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=27589 MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-29 09:27 --- Thanks. It seems that the nightly builds are done on the HEAD only, so I guess I have to retrieve the source from CVS and build myself. Or is there any plan to have nightly builds for 2.0 support also? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27589] - MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown
Message sent. Mike On Mar 29, 2004, at 4:26 PM, Oleg Kalnichevski wrote: Mike, I believe the only way to find this out is to approach the infrastructure folks ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Oleg On Mon, 2004-03-29 at 15:30, Michael Becke wrote: Yes, unfortunately the nightly builds are from HEAD. I'm not sure if we can create both 2.0 and HEAD nightly builds. Anyone know more about this? Mike On Mar 29, 2004, at 4:27 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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=27589. 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=27589 MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-29 09:27 --- Thanks. It seems that the nightly builds are done on the HEAD only, so I guess I have to retrieve the source from CVS and build myself. Or is there any plan to have nightly builds for 2.0 support also? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27589] - MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown
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=27589. 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=27589 MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27589] - MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown
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=27589. 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=27589 MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-24 10:55 --- I believe this behavior is justified (after all, shutting down connection manager is all about closing connections it manages, imo) as long as this fact is reflected in the javadocs and documentation. Oleg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27589] - MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown
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=27589. 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=27589 MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-24 03:51 --- Created an attachment (id=10938) One more try - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27589] - MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown
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=27589. 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=27589 MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-24 03:56 --- Ok, I was just going to commit the last patch, but I thought of one more thing. This patch now closes and releases all connections associated with the connection manager, including those that are checked out. Please let me know if there are any comments/suggestions. If there are no objections I will apply tomorrow. Mike - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27589] - MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown
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=27589. 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=27589 MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-17 22:51 --- Mike, the multithreaded connection manager of yours is still a sort of a black art to me ;-) But from what I can tell, the patch looks fine. The decision whether the patch is safe to be included it into 2.0 branch can only rest with you, as you are the one who knows the code best Oleg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27589] - MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown
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=27589. 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=27589 MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-18 04:23 --- Yes, it has become pretty complicated. These changes are pretty safe I think, and are needed to fix a hole in the current 2.0 distribution. I will make a few more documentation enhancements and apply the patch, if there are no objections. Mike - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27589] - MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown
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=27589. 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=27589 MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-15 11:27 --- Hi Mike, Thanks for this patch, I just reviewed the code and it does meet our requirements, it would be great if it could be part of 2.0 code base especially as your implementation is safe because it should have no side effect for applications not using this new feature. Gael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27589] - MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown
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=27589. 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=27589 MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-12 15:38 --- This is a MUST HAVE feature. It is causing a resource leak in our server software that is going to force us to not use this library. If thread A makes a blocking IO HTTP request on a host, then thread B needs to be able to call Socket.close(), forcing an IO Exception on thread A so it wakes up from a blocking Socket.read() call. IS there any workaround that would let us do it NOW? Could you suggest how I could modify my own version of the code to do it? URGENTLY NEEDED. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27589] - MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown
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=27589. 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=27589 MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-12 18:02 --- Hi Dave, I think what you are looking for is slightly different. It sounds like you want to abort a single HttpMethod. This feature is covered in bug #20288. Your options, until this gets solved officially, are to add an abort method that closes the method's connection, or to use timeouts. In particular setting the socket read timeout, HttpClient.setTimeout(), should handle the case you mention. Mike - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27589] - MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown
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=27589. 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=27589 MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-11 03:34 --- Created an attachment (id=10752) Take 1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27589] - MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown
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=27589. 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=27589 MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-11 03:39 --- Hi Gael, Here's a quick stab at this one. Please let me know if this is what you were looking for. I do not know if this change will make it into the 2.0 code base. It may have to wait until 3.0 for an official inclusion. How does everyone else feel about this? Mike - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
