I just wanted to know if I was correct else I agree with you ;D On Oct 11, 2011, at 2:29 PM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
> On 11 October 2011 09:15, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi igor >> >> I imagine that if the server is not run headless then the screen will be >> filled up with debuggers and people can try if they succeed to >> connect to the image using a remote tools. Even if I prefer a real headless >> mode, is my sentence correct? >> > Yes. But read the phrase "filled up with debuggers" again: i bet that > in 99% cases people just closing debuggers and not wasting time > to analyse the cause of every error by opening individual debugger etc. > It makes no sense. What makes sense is to add code which doing this > automatically + some error logging. > >> Stef >> >> >> On Oct 11, 2011, at 1:05 AM, Igor Stasenko wrote: >> >>> On 11 October 2011 01:27, Schwab,Wilhelm K <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> John, >>>> >>>> No question, the punishment certainly exceeds the crime :) I was making >>>> a general plea for what I really believe is the correct way to build >>>> network software. >>>> >>> So you prefer leaving an image in some undefined state, potentially >>> leaking system resources, >>> because of unhandled exception which nobody cares to handle? >>> At best what you can have then is, when your critical process will >>> enter an endless error-producing loop >>> is just bogging all system resources or hanging an image, without >>> giving you any idea what's going on. >>> So , if you prefer such kind of punishment for your crimes, just use >>> image prior to 1.3 and be happy :) >>> >>>> Bill >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: [email protected] >>>> [[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Toohey >>>> [[email protected]] >>>> Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 5:24 PM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Socket timeout terminates COG VM >>>> >>>> The exception is not coming from my code, if it was I could trap it. >>>> Regardless, isn't shutting the VM down a bit of overkill in this case? >>>> >>>> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 17:12, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> On 10 October 2011 23:19, John Toohey <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I've had a problem since 1.0 with socket timeouts throwing exceptions >>>>>> and invoking the debugger in my headless images. I don't know why a >>>>>> socket timeout is considered exceptional, but I've gotten used to >>>>>> using VNC to log into the server and close the debuger windows. >>>>>> However, I've moved to COG and the latest one-click images, and now >>>>>> the error terminates the VM. >>>>>> >>>>>> My app is a standard Seaside server, using the streaming connector for >>>>>> Comet support. >>>>>> >>>>>> I've attached the PharoDebug.log. It would be appreciated if anyone >>>>>> could help me with this problem, as I'm at a loss where to even begin. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So, just put an exception handler, and handle this exception in a >>>>> manner you want >>>>> and then your image will keep working! :) >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Using Pharo1.3 #13298 on Lucid32 (Ubuntu) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> ~JT >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> Igor Stasenko. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> ~JT >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Best regards, >>> Igor Stasenko. >>> >> >> >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko. >
