Jim Redman wrote: > Dan, > > On 2002.02.27 11:10:10 -0700 Daniel Rall wrote: > >> Jim Redman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> > I have no idea - I don't use the XmlRpcClient directly, only the Lite >> > so I don't know the behavior of the XmlRpcClient in this case. >> >> public class XmlRpcClientLite >> extends XmlRpcClient >> > > Surely, but the action is in the "Worker" and I have no idea whether > the behavior of the XmlRpcClient.Worker is the same as > XmlRpcClientLite.LiteWorker. The execute methods are completely > different and may, or may not, exhibit the same problems. > > If they don't, perhaps my fix is entirly at the wrong level and the > problem is correctable lower in the protocol. If they do, then > probably the fix should be applied in the superclass. > > Jim >
I'm sure this was a problem of the XmlRpcClientLite class only. XmlRpcClient uses java.net.URLConnection, and even if it should use keepalive it definitely doesn't put the burden of checking for keepalive intricacies (like closed connections) on the programmer. Hannes
