RE: Patch for adding SO_REUSEPORT socket option

Hi All, Here is an update on the progress. Based on the comments and feedback we received, we modified following items in the upcoming version of the patch (will be version #6). We are in the process of testing. I will be on vacation from Dec. 9th and will be back to office on Dec. 17th. We wil

Re: 8143397: It looks like InetAddress.isReachable(timeout) works incorrectly

Hi Rob, change looks fine and handles the MS idiosyncrasies neatly change works fine ... consistent responses and failing test returns expected results regards Mark On 09/12/2015 01:44, Rob McKenna wrote: The intention of the 2nd revision of the fix is to make the undocumented 1000ms

Re: 8143397: It looks like InetAddress.isReachable(timeout) works incorrectly

On 12/9/2015 9:44 AM, Rob McKenna wrote: > The intention of the 2nd revision of the fix is to make the undocumented > 1000ms problem a non issue. > > If a user calls this function with a timeout of 200ms that timeout is > automatically substituted for 1000ms in the IcmpSendEcho call. Once the > re

Re: 8143397: It looks like InetAddress.isReachable(timeout) works incorrectly

The intention of the 2nd revision of the fix is to make the undocumented 1000ms problem a non issue. If a user calls this function with a timeout of 200ms that timeout is automatically substituted for 1000ms in the IcmpSendEcho call. Once the response is received its RTT is checked to make sur

Re: 8143397: It looks like InetAddress.isReachable(timeout) works incorrectly

Is it nice to say in the spec that it is not reliable if the timeout is too small? At least 1000ms timeout by default may be not acceptable in some circumstances. Xuelei On 12/9/2015 12:31 AM, Rob McKenna wrote: > Testing has shown that when a timeout < 1000ms is specified the > IcmpSendEcho cal

RE: Patch for adding SO_REUSEPORT socket option

Thank you very much for your help, Alan! Thanks, Lucy -Original Message- From: Alan Bateman [mailto:alan.bate...@oracle.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 8:46 AM To: Lu, Yingqi ; Michael McMahon ; Volker Simonis Cc: Kaczmarek, Eric ; net-dev@openjdk.java.net; Kharbas, Kishor ; Vis

Re: Patch for adding SO_REUSEPORT socket option

On 08/12/2015 00:53, Lu, Yingqi wrote: Hi Alan, I heard that the feature freeze for OpenJDK9 is approaching. Given the significant performance impact (up to 1.93x with Hadoop Distributed File System) this feature provides and the status of the existing work, we would be really interested in

Re: 8143397: It looks like InetAddress.isReachable(timeout) works incorrectly

Testing has shown that when a timeout < 1000ms is specified the IcmpSendEcho calls fail (apparently) randomly. Once the timeout is 1000ms or greater it works as expected. Therefore I've updated the fix to use 1000ms as a minimum. The existing logic ensures that the ttl is less than the specifie

Re: RFR [9] 8143554: UnsupportedOperationException is not thrown for unsupported options

On 08/12/2015 13:44, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: Hi Alan, thank you for your replay. Please let me explain a little. For example ServerSocket and Socket have different supported options set, but the same SocketImpl under the hood. Yes, SocketImpl's setOptions() and getOptions() can be modified

Re: RFR [9] 8143554: UnsupportedOperationException is not thrown for unsupported options

Hi Alan, thank you for your replay. Please let me explain a little. For example ServerSocket and Socket have different supported options set, but the same SocketImpl under the hood. Yes, SocketImpl's setOptions() and getOptions() can be modified to add additional check for the actual socket typ

Re: RFR [9] 8143554: UnsupportedOperationException is not thrown for unsupported options

I'm sure Michael will look at this but I have a question - shouldn't SocketImpl throw UOE for this case? I'm just wondering if checking the supported options in setOption/getOption is just covering up an issue with the SocketImpl methods. -Alan On 08/12/2015 12:36, Svetlana Nikandrova wrot

Re: RFR [9] 8143554: UnsupportedOperationException is not thrown for unsupported options

Little reminder. On 03.12.2015 16:06, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: Hello, please review a simple fix for: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143554 See webrev here: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8143554/webrev.00/ Fix add