Mikhail Markov wrote: > On 12/27/06, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Mikhail Markov wrote: >> > Why not use ServerSocket(0) to just *obtain* some positive non-busy >> port >> > number (and close it after port number obtaining) and after that test >> > ServerSocket constructor with this obtained port number? In this case >> we'll >> > not require any reserved ports at all. >> >> There is obviously a race condition there, so you may have to make a >> number of attempts to get the port you think is now free before others >> take it. > > The only race condition i see here is that another process could take this > port between closing of 1-st ServerSocket and opening a new one. > Is this what you mean? > (But the same thing may happen if one of applications takes pre-defined > fixed port at any point during tests run when it's free.)
Exactly -- that's why you may need a number of attempts. Regards, Tim
