DO NOT REPLY [Bug 17014] - ServletResponse.flushBuffer() no longer commits the response
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17014. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17014 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC|[EMAIL PROTECTED]| |m | -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 17014] - ServletResponse.flushBuffer() no longer commits the response
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17014. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17014 ServletResponse.flushBuffer() no longer commits the response --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-25 12:12 --- Can you tell me what the problem is with at least calling socket.shutdownOutput() before closing? You have to agree that you are making a assumption about implementations that is not stated in the interface specification. /Sam - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 17014] - ServletResponse.flushBuffer() no longer commits the response
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17014.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17014
ServletResponse.flushBuffer() no longer commits the response
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|INVALID |
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-24 22:44 ---
I just ran into this problem myself. I've been working on integrating my own
socket factory into the coyote connecter code (a socket factory that produces
secure sockets) and this socket factory produces sockets that do not flush on
close so I never get any replies. I don't think that socket.close() can be
assumed to flush the output stream (at least the javadoc doesn't say so) and
shutdownOutput() or flush() are never called. I think that this line in
org.apache.coyote.http11.Http11Protocol:
// recycle kernel sockets ASAP
try { if (socket != null) socket.close (); }
should be changed to either include a call to socket.shutdownOutput() or
out.flush() before the close.
/Sam
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 17014] - ServletResponse.flushBuffer() no longer commits the response
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17014. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17014 ServletResponse.flushBuffer() no longer commits the response [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-16 08:16 --- Hmmm. No. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 17014] - ServletResponse.flushBuffer() no longer commits the response
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17014. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17014 ServletResponse.flushBuffer() no longer commits the response [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Component|Connector:Coyote HTTP/1.1 |Connector:Coyote Product|Tomcat 4|Tomcat 5 Resolution|WORKSFORME | Version|4.1.18 |5.0.19 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-16 04:43 --- This bug appears in tomcat 5.0.19 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 17014] - ServletResponse.flushBuffer() no longer commits the response
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17014.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17014
ServletResponse.flushBuffer() no longer commits the response
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-03-22 02:27 ---
I am seeing the same problem after upgrading from 4.0.1 to 4.1.18-21.
There are definitely delays for client side to get response. It
happens intermittenly and is not easy to reproduce yet consistently enough
to becomes a performance issue. I am seeing the problem with TC4.1.18+
running in Windows 2000 and Solaris 2.6 with jdk1.3 and jdk1.4. If I
install the legacy http connector, it works fine.
The server code is very simple:
public void doGet(HttpServletRequest req, HttpServletResponse res) throws
javax.servlet.ServletException {
res.setStatus(res.SC_OK);
PrintWriter out = null;
// generate response and assign to tmp
out = res.getWriter();
res.setContentType(text/plain);
out.write(tmp);
out.flush();
out.close();
}
The same code has been working great with TC4.0.1.
Any help is greatly appreciated.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
