Andrew Zhang wrote: > On 12/27/06, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Mikhail Markov wrote: >> > On 12/27/06, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> 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. > > > Attempt if the port doesn't work? Is it caused by code bug or real port > confliction? :-)
Good question -- who knows<g> Tim
