[mailto:f...@agentpp.com]
Sent: Donnerstag, 12. April 2018 21:28
To: Steffen Brüntjen
Cc: snmp4j@agentpp.org
Subject: Re: [SNMP4J] Timeouts in version 2.5.7+
Hi Steffen,
That was probably too fast :-(. I made an error when merging from master branch
to the 2.x release
which introduced the bug you mentione
kManager to be idle, then runs through the taskManagers (third time) and
> may find all taskManagers busy again.
>
> Thank you for your very quick fix!
>
> Best regards,
> Steffen Brüntjen
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Frank Fock [mailto:f...@agentpp.co
om]
Sent: Dienstag, 10. April 2018 17:25
To: Steffen Brüntjen
Cc: snmp4j@agentpp.org
Subject: Re: [SNMP4J] Timeouts in version 2.5.7+
Hi Steffen,
OK, many thanks for helping sorting this out. I support your analysis and will
provide a fix a soon as possible.
Best regards,
Frank
> On 10
cute() wouldn't return, in fact it would stay in line 103 (SNMP4J-2.5.7),
> and that's exactly what we can see in the stacktrace. In version 2.5.6,
> notify could not happen between tm.isIdle() and wait() because execute() was
> synchronized.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
ic void execute(WorkerTask task) {
while (true) {
for (int i=0; imailto:f...@agentpp.com]
Sent: Montag, 9. April 2018 20:59
To: Steffen Brüntjen
Cc: snmp4j@agentpp.org
Subject: Re: [SNMP4J] Timeouts in version 2.5.7+
Hi Steffen,
I understood the problem very well, but I am trying to find a
with the two identical stack traces I
> was trying to point out that there's no indication of a missing TaskManager
> thread.
>
>
> Best regards and thanks,
> Steffen Brüntjen
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Frank Fock [mailto
s and thanks,
Steffen Brüntjen
-Original Message-
From: Frank Fock [mailto:f...@agentpp.com]
Sent: Freitag, 6. April 2018 15:40
To: Steffen Brüntjen
Cc: snmp4j@agentpp.org
Subject: Re: [SNMP4J] Timeouts in version 2.5.7+
Is your timeout value big enough?
I do not see any differences in th
MessageDispatcherImpl:
>>
>> protected PduHandle createPduHandle() {
>> return new PduHandle(getNextRequestID());
>> }
>>
>>
>> There's only one static snmp instance for all targets, I read somewhere that
>> this is the preferred implementat
org.snmp4j.util.ThreadPool$TaskManager)
Best regards
Steffen Brüntjen
-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Fock [mailto:f...@agentpp.com]
Sent: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 00:54
To: Steffen Brüntjen
Cc: snmp4j@agentpp.org
Subject: Re: [SNMP4J] Timeouts in version 2.5.7+
Hi Steffen,
Fr
emote debug the program, but I wouldn't know where to look
> at. Also, it's a bit of extra work and it will take a while, but it's
> possible.
>
>
> Best regards,
> Steffen
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Frank Fock [mailto:f...@agentpp.
üntjen
Cc: snmp4j@agentpp.org
Subject: Re: [SNMP4J] Timeouts in version 2.5.7+
Hi Steffen,
There was no change on the DefaultUdpTransportMapping between 2.5.6 and 2.5.7,
thus I assume that behaviour change is a side effect of some other changes.
SNMP4J is no a bit faster.
Have you checked your
Hi Steffen,
There was no change on the DefaultUdpTransportMapping between 2.5.6 and 2.5.7,
thus I assume that behaviour change is a side effect of some other changes.
SNMP4J is no a bit faster.
Have you checked your code for race conditions?
When you use Snmp.send, how do you create the request
12 matches
Mail list logo
