[Bug 60718] requestDestroyed not called for asynchronous after I/O error

2017-02-15 Thread bugzilla
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60718 Mark Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug 60718] requestDestroyed not called for asynchronous after I/O error

2017-02-15 Thread bugzilla
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60718 --- Comment #7 from Mark Thomas --- Many thanks for the test case. I've applied a fix to trunk (9.0.x) that addresses the issues raised by the test case. Before I back-port it, I want to look at whether the error handling needs some refactoring

[Bug 60718] requestDestroyed not called for asynchronous after I/O error

2017-02-15 Thread bugzilla
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60718 --- Comment #6 from Mark Thomas --- I like the idea of moving the context.fireRequestDestroyEvent(request) call to AsyncContextImpl.fireOnComplete(). That is much better aligned with what section 3.12 of the spec says. A quick test with the cu

[Bug 60718] requestDestroyed not called for asynchronous after I/O error

2017-02-14 Thread bugzilla
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60718 --- Comment #5 from Brett Kail --- Tomcat doesn't appear to call AsyncListener for these scenarios either. FWIW, I agree with the "in scope" interpretation. I was expecting requestDestroyed to be called only after the request is no longer "in

[Bug 60718] requestDestroyed not called for asynchronous after I/O error

2017-02-14 Thread bugzilla
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60718 --- Comment #4 from Remy Maucherat --- I think it's not going to "work" unless AsyncContextImpl.fireOnComplete calls context.fireRequestDestroyEvent(request). Or something like that. The Tomcat code is based on the thinking that the request re

[Bug 60718] requestDestroyed not called for asynchronous after I/O error

2017-02-10 Thread bugzilla
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60718 --- Comment #3 from Brett Kail --- It's likely the same (or a related) problem, but access log entries are not written for the failing cases either (ala bug 58702). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. ---

[Bug 60718] requestDestroyed not called for asynchronous after I/O error

2017-02-09 Thread bugzilla
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60718 Brett Kail changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|NEW -- You are receiving this mail becau

[Bug 60718] requestDestroyed not called for asynchronous after I/O error

2017-02-09 Thread bugzilla
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60718 --- Comment #2 from Brett Kail --- Created attachment 34742 --> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34742&action=edit test project I reviewed bug 60385 before opening this bug, and I do not think it is relevant. That bug is abo

[Bug 60718] requestDestroyed not called for asynchronous after I/O error

2017-02-09 Thread bugzilla
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60718 Remy Maucherat changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |NEEDINFO OS|