I'm trying to secure my web application against timeouts of ajax requests.
To do it, I obviously need to simulate such a timeout.
From what I've found here:
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Network.http.connect.timeout#Background
the firefox timeout is system-dependent and from what I've found here: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/181050 the IE timeout period is 60 minutes by default.
So I see the following ways to simulate a timeout:
make the server wait 60 minutes (yuck ;))
change the IE timeout period to a smaller value (which requires registry changes)
configure a proxy between the client and the server and make it timeout
All the ways above seem like an overkill to me. Does anyone know an easier way (possibly on a different browser)?
Thanks!
Wouldn't it be much easier to simply set the ajax timeout to 1 millisecond. Even on localhost it will always timeout at that value. This is the method I always use. The only thing you don't exercise with this approach is the actual "feel" that your preferred timeout period gives to the end user (ie, does 3 seconds feel long, is 2 seconds too short). But if you're just looking to exercise the code under the error response this does the trick for me.
Eventually the easiest way for me was simulate the timeout by setting ReceiveTimeout in registry HKEY_CURRENT_USER\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings
as described here:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/181050
Darshan's solution might also work, but I just tested the above. Thank you all for help!
whats harm in setting KeepAliveTimeout in registry
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\InternetSettings ?
More information can be found here:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/181050
It's simple, set the timeout to 10.
like this : xhr.timeout = 10;
Related
I need a server to perform lots of timing operations and trigger code accordingly.
So I'll break my wonderings into simple questions:
How are timeout and timeout callback usually work in terms of OS resources and threads?
(say the nodejs setTimeout(callback, delay))
Should I refrain from that and maybe have a timer worker to check every second for timeouts?
e.i. if i need 10 timeouts, keep a collection of all timeout timestamps and check every second if any of them is due.
What would be a good framework / platform to implement this kind of behaviour?
Please comment if you think I'm being unclear,
Thanks in advance.
"Depends"
Most timer implementations are extremely lightweight (i.e. having zillions of timers going at once). A timer core is little more than a priority queue of "things soon to expire", and then expiring them every second.
Things are different when lots of them fire all at once, that is NOT lightweight (as all the real work starts).
This time my problem is delay between ajax request, and php file response.I have checked it out with google chrome statistics, and it shows almost always exact 1 second wait time every time function loops and sends ajax GET request.This makes my script pretty much unusable cause it slows so much, that browser get's unresponsive till it executes full loop.
I tried to remove all MYSQL queries, so exclude MYSQL as the problem, and delay still existed.Im pretty much sure it's not MYSQL taking so long to execute.
Does anyone have any idea what may be this delay caused on.Maybe it's some settings on my PC, or something with AJAX?
Thank You
Maybe this will explain better.
YES!I've figured it out.Apearantly my MYSQL connection have taken it's time, the reason was that i've used localhost to initiate connection instead 127.0.0.1.Now It's much MUCH faster! :D .No reason blaming AJAX, simple 127.0.0.1 did the trick.
I want to load test a URL by hitting it few hundred times at same millisecond . I tried JMeter but I could hit 2 request at same millisecond. This seems to be problem that my machine cant create threads fast enough . Is there any solution to the issue ?
In JMeter you can use synchronizing timer setting it to 100, this way all threads will wait until there are 100 available and hit the server:
http://jmeter.apache.org/usermanual/component_reference.html#Synchronizing_Timer
Another solution is to increase the number of Threads so that you hit this throughput.
In next coming version (2.8) of JMeter you will be able to create threads on demand (created once needed).
Anyway hitting few hundred times at same millisecond is a high load so you will have to tune JMeter correctly.
Regards
Philippe
JMeter uses blocking HTTP client, in order to hit the server at the exact same time with 100 reqeusts you need 100 threads in JMeter. Even providing that, you still don't have 100 cores to actually run such code at the same time. Even if you had 100 cores, it takes some time to start a thread, so you would have to start them in advance and synchronize on some sort of barrier. And that is not supported in JMeter.
Why do you really want to run your server "at same millisecond"? An ordinary load test just calls the server with as many connections as possible, but not necessarily at the same time. Moreover, sometimes you are even adding random sleep between requests to simulate so-called think time.
As per Philippe's answer, JMeter does in fact support synchronous requests. But maybe for what you want something like Apache Bench using -c100 (or tune it to whatever works) is a better option? It's pretty basic stuff but then the overhead is a lot smaller which might help in this situation.
But I would also steal from Tomasz's answer and echo his concern that perhaps this is not really the best way to approach load testing. If you're trying to replicate real life traffic then do you really need such a high level of concurrency?
You need to use Jmeter-server and a host of client machines for load generation. Your single machine is not enough to generate the load itself.
I have this strange issue where sometimes if I make two AJAX requests to my Apache 2.2 server in rapid succession, the second request will wait for the first to finish before finishing.
Example, I have two requests, one that sleeps for 10 seconds and one that returns immediately. If I run the request that returns immediatly by itself it will always return within 300ms. However, if I call the request that takes 10 seconds, and then call the request that returns right away about 50% of the time the second request will wait until the first finishes and chrome will report that the request too about 10 seconds before receiving a response. The other half of the time the quick request will return right away.
I can't find any pattern to make it behave one way or another, it will just randomly block the quick AJAX requests sometimes, and other times it will behave as expected. I'm working on a dev server that only I am accessing and I've set several variables such as MaxRequestsPerChild to a high value.
Does anyone have any idea why Apache, seemingly at random, is turning my AJAX requests into synchronous requests?
Here is the code I'm running:
$.ajax({async:true,dataType:'json',url:'/progressTest',success:function(d){console.log('FINAL',d)}}); // Sleeps for 10 seconds
$.ajax({async:true,dataType:'json',url:'/progressTestStatus',success:function(d){console.log('STATUS',d)}}); // Takes ~300ms
And here are two screen shots. The first where it behaved as expected and the second where it waited for the slow process to finish first (in the example the timeout was set to 3 seconds).
UPDATE: Per the comments below - this appears to be related to Chrome only performing one request at a time. Any ideas why Chrome would set such a low limit on async requests?
The problem is not with Apache but with Google Chrome limiting the number of concurrent requests to your development server. I can only make guesses as to why it's limited to one request. Here are a couple:
1) Do you have many tabs open? There is a limit to the total number of concurrent connections and if you have many tabs making requests with KeepAlive you may be at that limit and can only establish one connect to your server. If that's the case you might be able to fix that by adding KeepAlive to your own output headers.
2) Do you have some extensions enabled. Some extensions do weird things to the browser. Try disabling all your extensions and making the same requests. If it works then enable them one at a time to find the culprit extension.
I have an application running in CF8 which does calls to external systems like search engine and ldaps often. But at times some request never gets the response and is shown always in the the active request list.
Even tho there is request timeout set in the administration, its not getting applied to these scenarios.
I have around 5 request still pending to be finished for the last 20hours !!!
My server settings are as below
Timeout Requests after ( seconds) : 300 sec
Max no of simultaneous requests : 20
Maximum number of running JRun threads : 50
Maximum number of running JRun threads : 1000
Timeout requests waiting in queue after 300 seconds
I read through some articles and found there are cases where threads are never responded or killed. But i dont have a solid solution how can i timeout this or kill this automatically
really appreciated if you guys have some idea on this :)
The ColdFusion timeout does not apply to 'third party' connections.
A long-running LDAP query, for example, will take as long as it needs. When the calling template gets the result from the query your timeout will apply.
This often leads to confusion interpreting errors. You will get an error saying that whichever function after the long running request causes the timeout.
Further reading available here
You can (and probably should) set a timeout on the CFLDAP call itself. http://help.adobe.com/en_US/ColdFusion/9.0/CFMLRef/WSc3ff6d0ea77859461172e0811cbec22c24-7f97.html
Thanks, Antony, for recommending my blog entry CF911: Lies, Damned Lies, and CF Request Timeouts...What You May Not Realize. This problem of requests not timing out when expected can be very troublesome and a surprise for most.
But Anooj, while that at least explains WHY they don't die (and you can't kill them within CF), one thing to consider is that you may be able to kill them in the REMOTE server being called, in your case, the LDAP server.
You may be able to go to the administrator of THAT server and on showing them that CF has a long-running request, they may be able to spot and resolve the problem. And if they can, that may free the connection from CF and your request then will stop.
I have just added a new section on this idea to the bottom of that blog entry, as "So is there really nothing I can do for the hung requests?"
Hope that helps.