En Wed, 12 Dec 2007 20:12:43 -0300, Object01 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribi�:
> I don't know much about the timing of Python's garbage collection. Is
> it pretty aggressive?
As soon as the reference count reaches zero (at least for current CPython
version). Objects that are part of a reference cy
Object01 wrote:
> Is there something I can look for in the packet traffic that would
> indicate one party is misbehaving? The sequence numbers seem ok.
> *shrug* I'd expect to see data sent from server to client and
> then see a sequence of packets that close the connection
> gracefully. Instead
> Is this applicable in your
> case?:http://brad.livejournal.com/2152593.html?thread=10832273#t10832273
> (closing a nonblocking socket with a nonempty output queue generates a RST)
Based on my stepping through the code, everything passed to
_fileobject.write() makes it out onto the wire just fin
En Wed, 12 Dec 2007 13:38:21 -0300, Object01 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> On Dec 11, 6:17 pm, "Gabriel Genellina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> En Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:51:13 -0300, Object01 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> escribi�:
>>
>> > I've been working with the source code for Trac (http://
>> >
En Wed, 12 Dec 2007 15:46:14 -0300, Bjoern Schliessmann
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> Gabriel Genellina wrote:
>> A RST when you close a socket is OK.
> Says who? MS? ;)
Nevermind... just nonsense!
--
Gabriel Genellina
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Do you have any non-standard network hardware along the route? Perhaps a
transparent proxy like a load balancer or a firewall of sorts? I've seen
this type of thing happen before with load balancer gear. In my situation,
I had a load balancer that kept a state table. If the load balancer didn't
On Dec 12, 12:45 pm, Bjoern Schliessmann wrote:
> Object01 wrote:
> > The server is multithreaded, handling each request on its own
> > thread.
>
> Ugh.
>
> > But is a RST really a part of a valid close operation?
>
> Depends on the state of the parties :) The proper way to close
> non-defunct con
Gabriel Genellina wrote:
> A RST when you close a socket is OK.
Says who? MS? ;)
Regards,
Björn
--
BOFH excuse #328:
Fiber optics caused gas main leak
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Object01 wrote:
> The server is multithreaded, handling each request on its own
> thread.
Ugh.
> But is a RST really a part of a valid close operation?
Depends on the state of the parties :) The proper way to close
non-defunct connections is using FIN segments.
> It was my understanding that
On Dec 11, 6:17 pm, "Gabriel Genellina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> En Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:51:13 -0300, Object01 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribi�:
>
> > I've been working with the source code for Trac (http://
> > trac.edgewall.org/) lately and have run across a bizarre problem. It
> > seems that all
En Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:51:13 -0300, Object01 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribi�:
> I've been working with the source code for Trac (http://
> trac.edgewall.org/) lately and have run across a bizarre problem. It
> seems that all POST requests to Trac's standalone server (tracd) have
> a random chance of
I've been working with the source code for Trac (http://
trac.edgewall.org/) lately and have run across a bizarre problem. It
seems that all POST requests to Trac's standalone server (tracd) have
a random chance of causing the server to issue a TCP RST packet that
resets the connection.
Running T
12 matches
Mail list logo
