*TimeOutHandlers

[Trustin Lee]

I think it's a bug.  I thought I test the scenario you described, but
it looks like I missed something.  Will catch up this weekend.  Thanks
for reporting a bug!

— Trustin Lee, http://gleamynode.net/



On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 10:06 PM, Christian Migowski
<chrismfwrd at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was playing around with the new TimeoutHandlers (which are a great
> addition to Netty!) and found out that they are quite inaccurate. I
> setup a small sample which one server and just one client which are
> not sending regular messages, just in case of a timeout, and found out
> that the read timeout is of up to 4 seconds (in both directions) when
> wanting a 10 second timeout. Here is how I setup the server chain
> (client doesn't do timeout handling):
>
>        Timer timer = new HashedWheelTimer(10, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS, 10);
>        pipeline.addLast("readTimeout", new ReadTimeoutHandler(timer, 10,
> TimeUnit.SECONDS));
>        pipeline.addLast("writeTimeout", new WriteTimeoutHandler(timer, 5,
> TimeUnit.SECONDS));
>
>        pipeline.addLast("handler", new TestHandler());
>
>
> and this is the exceptionCaught() of TestHandler method:
>    public void exceptionCaught(ChannelHandlerContext ctx, ExceptionEvent e) {
>        if (e.getCause() instanceof ChannelWriteTimeoutException) {
>            System.out.println(new
> SimpleDateFormat("HH:mm:ss.SSS").format(new Date())+" writetimeout");
>            writeTime(e.getChannel());
>        } else if (e.getCause() instanceof ChannelReadTimeoutException) {
>            System.out.println(new
> SimpleDateFormat("HH:mm:ss.SSS").format(new Date())+" readtimeout");
>            writeTime(e.getChannel());
>        } else {
>            e.getCause().printStackTrace();
>            Channel ch = e.getChannel();
>            ch.close().awaitUninterruptibly();
>            System.out.println("channel closed");
>        }
>    }
>
> it produces e.g. this output:
>
> 13:58:39.773 readtimeout
> 13:58:46.634 readtimeout
> 13:58:53.506 readtimeout
> 13:59:00.378 readtimeout
> 13:59:07.238 readtimeout
> 13:59:14.110 readtimeout
> 13:59:20.971 readtimeout
> 13:59:27.843 readtimeout
> 13:59:34.714 readtimeout
> 13:59:41.575 readtimeout
> 13:59:48.447 readtimeout
> 13:59:55.319 readtimeout
> 14:00:02.179 readtimeout
> 14:00:09.120 readtimeout
> 14:00:17.974 readtimeout
>
>
> as you can see it is never 10 seconds. Also, although the writetimeout
> is set lower, it is never fired, which seems like a bug to me.
> Also, because of that inaccurateness, sometimes exceptions in the
> timer occur (this is not always reproducable):
>
> 06.02.2009 12:37:00 org.jboss.netty.handler.timeout.HashedWheelTimer
> WARNUNG: An exception was thrown by TimerTask.
> java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: delay must be greater than
> 10000000 nanoseconds
>        at org.jboss.netty.handler.timeout.HashedWheelTimer.checkDelay(HashedWheelTimer.java:242)
>        at org.jboss.netty.handler.timeout.HashedWheelTimer.newTimeout(HashedWheelTimer.java:197)
>        at org.jboss.netty.handler.timeout.ReadTimeoutHandler$ReadTimeoutTask.run(ReadTimeoutHandler.java:145)
>        at org.jboss.netty.handler.timeout.HashedWheelTimer$HashedWheelTimeout.expire(HashedWheelTimer.java:399)
>        at org.jboss.netty.handler.timeout.HashedWheelTimer$Worker.notifyExpiredTimeouts(HashedWheelTimer.java:318)
>        at org.jboss.netty.handler.timeout.HashedWheelTimer$Worker.run(HashedWheelTimer.java:266)
>        at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:595)
>
>
> Is this (the inaccurateness) expected because of the implementation of
> the HashedWheelTimer or did I just choose unlucky values? Or is it a
> bug in the timer implementation?
>
>
>
>
> greetings,
> christian!
> _______________________________________________
> netty-users mailing list
> netty-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/netty-users
>