I am writing a kind of chat server app where a message received from one websocket client is sent out to all other websocket clients. To do this, I keep the connected clients in a list. When a client disconnects, I need to remove it from the list (so that future "sends" do not fail).
However, sometimes when a client disconnects, the server just gets an exception "connection reset by peer", and the code does not get chance to remove from the client list. Is there a way to guarantee a "nice" notification that the connection has been reset?
My code is:
void WsRequestHandler::handleRequest(HTTPServerRequest &req, HTTPServerResponse &resp)
{
int n;
Poco::Timespan timeOut(5,0);
try
{
req.set("Connection","Upgrade"); // knock out any extra tokens firefox may send such as "keep-alive"
ws = new WebSocket(req, resp);
ws->setKeepAlive(false);
connectedSockets->push_back(this);
do
{
flags = 0;
if (!ws->poll(timeOut,Poco::Net::Socket::SELECT_READ || Poco::Net::Socket::SELECT_ERROR))
{
// cout << ".";
}
else
{
n = ws->receiveFrame(buffer, sizeof(buffer), flags);
if (n > 0)
{
if ((flags & WebSocket::FRAME_OP_BITMASK) == WebSocket::FRAME_OP_BINARY)
{
// process and send out to all other clients
DoReceived(ws, buffer, n);
}
}
}
}
while ((flags & WebSocket::FRAME_OP_BITMASK) != WebSocket::FRAME_OP_CLOSE);
// client has closed, so remove from list
for (vector<WsRequestHandler *>::iterator it = connectedSockets->begin() ; it != connectedSockets->end(); ++it)
{
if (*it == this)
{
connectedSockets->erase(it);
logger->information("Connection closed %s", ws->peerAddress().toString());
break;
}
}
delete(ws);
ws = NULL;
}
catch (WebSocketException& exc)
{
//never gets called
}
}
See receiveFrame() documentation:
Returns the number of bytes received. A return value of 0 means that the peer has shut down or closed the connection.
So if receiveFrame() call returns zero, you can act acordingly.
I do not know if this is an answer to the question, but the implementation you have done does not deal with PING frames. This is currently (as of my POCO version: 1.7.5) not done automatically by the POCO framework. I put up a question about that recently. According to the RFC (6465), the ping and pong frames are used (among others) as a keep-alive function. This may therefore be critical to get right in order to get your connection stable over time. Much of this is guess-work from my side as I am experimenting with this now myself.
#Alex, you are a main developer of POCO I believe, a comment on my answer would be much appreciated.
I extended the catch, to do some exception handling for "Connection reset by peer".
catch (Poco::Net::WebSocketException& exc)
{
// Do something
}
catch (Poco::Exception& e)
{
// This is where the "Connection reset by peer" lands
}
A bit late to the party here... but I am using Poco and Websockets as well - and properly handling disconnects was tricky.
I ended up implementing a simple ping functionality myself where the client side sends an ACK message for every WS Frame it receives. A separate thread on the server side tries to read the ACK messages - and it will now detect when the client has disconnected by looking at flags | WebSocket::FRAME_OP_CLOSE.
//Serverside - POCO. Start thread for receiving ACK packages. Needed in order to detect when websocket is closed!
thread t0([&]()->void{
while((!KillFlag && ws!= nullptr && flags & WebSocket::FRAME_OP_BITMASK) != WebSocket::FRAME_OP_CLOSE && machineConnection != nullptr){
try{
if(ws == nullptr){
return;
}
if(ws->available() > 0){
int len = ws->receiveFrame(buffer, sizeof(buffer), flags);
}
else{
Util::Sleep(10);
}
}
catch(Poco::Exception &pex){
flags = flags | WebSocket::FRAME_OP_CLOSE;
return;
}
catch(...){
//log::info(string("Unknown exception in ACK Thread drained"));
return;
}
}
log::debug("OperatorWebHandler::HttpRequestHandler() Websocket Acking thread DONE");
});
on the client side I just send a dummy "ACK" message back to the server (JS) every time I receive a WS frame from the server (POCO).
websocket.onmessage = (evt) => {
_this.receivedData = JSON.parse(evt.data);
websocket.send("ACK");
};
It is not about disconnect handling, rather about the stability of the connection.
Had some issues with POCO Websocket server in StreamSocket mode and C# client. Sometimes the client sends Pong messages with zero length payload and disconnect occurs so I added Ping and Pong handling code.
int WebSocketImpl::receiveBytes(void* buffer, int length, int)
{
char mask[4];
bool useMask;
_frameFlags = 0;
for (;;) {
int payloadLength = receiveHeader(mask, useMask);
int frameOp = _frameFlags & WebSocket::FRAME_OP_BITMASK;
if (frameOp == WebSocket::FRAME_OP_PONG || frameOp ==
WebSocket::FRAME_OP_PING) {
std::vector<char> tmp(payloadLength);
if (payloadLength != 0) {
receivePayload(tmp.data(), payloadLength, mask, useMask);
}
if (frameOp == WebSocket::FRAME_OP_PING) {
sendBytes(tmp.data(), payloadLength, WebSocket::FRAME_OP_PONG);
}
continue;
}
if (payloadLength <= 0)
return payloadLength;
if (payloadLength > length)
throw WebSocketException(Poco::format("Insufficient buffer for
payload size %d", payloadLength),
WebSocket::WS_ERR_PAYLOAD_TOO_BIG);
return receivePayload(reinterpret_cast<char*>(buffer), payloadLength,
mask, useMask);
}
}
Related
At the moment I try to send packets between one Heltec WIFI LoRa V2 and another by reading the serial-line and sending the input via LoRa.
Small packets (like 30 bytes) work every time, but as bigger the packet gets the packet won't be received every time or even never.
So I write a little sending loop, where my sender sends at every iteration a packet, which gets every time 10 byte bigger, and surprisingly every packet was received by the sender (I tried that until 500 bytes).
After that, I wanted to send a 80 byte serial input message and this did not work. Do you know what's the problem with that?
void setup() {
// ... LoRa.begin(); ....
LoRa.onReceive(onReceive);
// ... LoRa.receive(); ...
}
void onReceive(int packetSize) { // uses the interrupt pin on the dio0
String packet = "";
packSize = String(packetSize,DEC);
for (int i = 0; i < packetSize; i++) {
packet += (char) LoRa.read();
}
Serial.println(packet);
delay(5);
} ```
``` // writer
boolean sendPacket (String packet) {
Serial.println("Send begin");
LoRa.beginPacket(false); // true: optional implicit mode (--> Set everything on both sides?!)
LoRa.setTxPower(14,RF_PACONFIG_PASELECT_PABOOST);
LoRa.print(packet); // also LoRa.write(byte(, length));
LoRa.endPacket(false); // true: async mode: doas not wair until transmission is completed
delay(250);
// put the radio into receive mode
LoRa.receive(); // set redio back in receive mode
delay(750);
Serial.println("Send end");
return true; // will be changed
}
void loop(){
while(Serial.available() > 0 ){
delay(2); //delay to allow byte to arrive in input buffer
String text = Serial.readString();
digitalWrite(LED, HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
boolean packetSent = false;
while (!packetSent) {
packetSent = sendPacket(text);
if (packetSent) {
Serial.print("Packet has been sent: ");
Serial.println(text);
} else {
Serial.print("Retry sending packet: ");
Serial.println(text);
}
}
digitalWrite(LED, LOW); // turn the LED off (HIGH is the voltage level)
}
} ```
In okhttp, it makes a 1 ms connection health check for every request. It has obvious influence in my application.
What's this check for?
Is it possible to add a config to disable the check?
if (doExtensiveChecks) {
try {
int readTimeout = socket.getSoTimeout();
try {
socket.setSoTimeout(1);
if (source.exhausted()) {
return false; // Stream is exhausted; socket is closed.
}
return true;
} finally {
socket.setSoTimeout(readTimeout);
}
} catch (SocketTimeoutException ignored) {
// Read timed out; socket is good.
} catch (IOException e) {
return false; // Couldn't read; socket is closed.
}
}
The most obvious fix would be to ensure you are using HTTP/2, which would skip this work on the socket and rely on pings etc.
FWIW extensive checks are based on the HTTP method, so should not be an issue with GET operations.
// We need the network to satisfy this request. Possibly for validating a conditional GET.
val doExtensiveHealthChecks = request.method != "GET"
val exchange = transmitter.newExchange(chain, doExtensiveHealthChecks)
Is this an option?
When I call "connect" to a Redis publisher, client gets exception "connect() failure" for some of my client/server combinations.
Other clients/servers run smoothly.
I am running Redis version 3.2.100 on windows (this is the newest windows Redis server available).
Using cpp_redis as client.
VisualStudio 2015 is my environment.
cpp_redis::redis_subscriber *subscriber = new cpp_redis::redis_subscriber();
std::string hostIP = 12.0.0.1; // Redis server IP address
int port = 6379;
std::string password = "my_password";
bool isConnected = false;
try
{
subscriber->connect(hostIP, port, nullptr);
if (password != "")
{
subscriber->auth(password,
[this](const cpp_redis::reply& reply)
{
if (!reply.is_error()
{
isConnected = true;
}
}
);
}
else
{
isConnected = true;
}
}
catch (const std::exception& exs)
{
std::cout << exs.what()) << std::endl;
}
works - and for other systems, I get exception on command
-- subscriber->connect(... etc. ?
the exception text is connect() failure
Any insights?
thank you!
mystery solved.
I had a bug in sending the Redis host ip to the clients which could not connect.
this was a really silly bug.
version:rocketmq-all-4.1.0-incubating
We send msg 1000 QPS,sync send, but throw exception:-
[TIMEOUT_CLEAN_QUEUE] broker busy, start flow control for a while
There is the related code:
while (true) {
try {
if (!this.brokerController.getSendThreadPoolQueue().isEmpty()) {
final Runnable runnable = this.brokerController.getSendThreadPoolQueue().peek();
if (null == runnable) {
break;
}
final RequestTask rt = castRunnable(runnable);
if (rt == null || rt.isStopRun()) {
break;
}
final long behind = System.currentTimeMillis() - rt.getCreateTimestamp();
if (behind >= this.brokerController.getBrokerConfig().getWaitTimeMillsInSendQueue()) {
if (this.brokerController.getSendThreadPoolQueue().remove(runnable)) {
rt.setStopRun(true);
rt.returnResponse(RemotingSysResponseCode.SYSTEM_BUSY, String.format("[TIMEOUT_CLEAN_QUEUE]broker busy, start flow control for a while, period in queue: %sms, size of queue: %d", behind, this.brokerController.getSendThreadPoolQueue().size()));
}
} else {
break;
}
} else {
break;
}
} catch (Throwable ignored) {
}
}
}
I find broker the default value of sendMessageThreadPoolNums is 1,
/**
* thread numbers for send message thread pool, since spin lock will be used by default since 4.0.x, the default value is 1.
*/
private int sendMessageThreadPoolNums = 1; //16 + Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors() * 4;
private int pullMessageThreadPoolNums = 16 + Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors() * 2;
but the previous version isn't 1, and if I configure sendMessageThreadPoolNums = 100, can resolve this question ? It will lead to what is different with default value.
thanks
SHORT ANSWER:
you have two choices:
set sendMessageThreadPoolNums to a small number, say 1, which is the default value after version 4.1.x. And, remain the default value of useReentrantLockWhenPutMessage=false, which is introduced after 4.1.x
sendMessageThreadPoolNums=1
useReentrantLockWhenPutMessage=false
If you need to use a large numbers of threads to process sending message, you'd better use useReentrantLockWhenPutMessage=true
sendMessageThreadPoolNums=128//large thread numbers
useReentrantLockWhenPutMessage=true // indicating that do NOT use spin lock but use ReentrantLock when putting message
I am writing a multithreaded client that uses an IO Completion Port.
I create and connect the socket that has the WSA_FLAG_OVERLAPPED attribute set.
if ((m_socket = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_TCP)) == INVALID_SOCKET)
{
throw std::exception("Failed to create socket.");
}
if (WSAConnectByName(m_socket, L"server.com", L"80", &localAddressLength, reinterpret_cast<sockaddr*>(&localAddress), &remoteAddressLength, &remoteAddress, NULL, NULL) == FALSE)
{
throw std::exception("Failed to connect.");
}
I associate the IO Completion Port with the socket.
if ((m_hIOCP = CreateIoCompletionPort(reinterpret_cast<HANDLE>(m_socket), m_hIOCP, NULL, 8)) == NULL)
{
throw std::exception("Failed to create IOCP object.");
}
All appears to go well until I try to send some data over the socket.
SocketData* socketData = new SocketData;
socketData->hEvent = 0;
DWORD bytesSent = 0;
if (WSASend(m_socket, socketData->SetBuffer(socketData->GenerateLoginRequestHeader()), 1, &bytesSent, NULL, reinterpret_cast<OVERLAPPED*>(socketData), NULL) == SOCKET_ERROR && WSAGetLastError() != WSA_IO_PENDING)
{
throw std::exception("Failed to send data.");
}
Instead of returning SOCKET_ERROR with the last error set to WSA_IO_PENDING, WSASend returns immediately.
I need the IO to pend and for it's completion to be handled in my thread function which is also my worker thread.
unsigned int __stdcall MyClass::WorkerThread(void* lpThis)
{
}
I've done this before but I don't know what is going wrong in this case, I'd greatly appreciate any efforts in helping me fix this problem.
It's not a problem unless you make it so.
As long as you're not calling SetFileCompletionNotificationModes() and setting the flag to skip completion port processing on success then even if WSARecv (or whatever) returns SUCCESS an IO Completion Packet is queued to the IOCP the same as if ERROR_IO_PENDING was returned. Thus you need no special handling for the non error return case.
See http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q192800 for details.
First of all break the call into more clear logic:
int nRet = WSASend(m_socket, socketData->SetBuffer(socketData->GenerateLoginRequestHeader()), 1, NULL, NULL, reinterpret_cast<OVERLAPPED*>(socketData), NULL);
if (nRet == SOCKET_ERROR)
{
if ((WSAGetLastError()) == WSA_IO_PENDING)
nRet = 0; // ok
else
throw std::exception("Failed to send data."); // failed
}
Also, as you can see in my code, you should NOT pass the "&bytesSent" parameter according to WSASend:
Use NULL for this parameter if the
lpOverlapped parameter is not NULL to
avoid potentially erroneous results.
Besides that your call to WSASend() looks fine.