Re: [tipc-discussion] Multiple socket supported?

[Stephens, A. <all...@wi...>]

Hi Ming:

TIPC 1.7.5 should allow you to have your third process receive messages
from the other two processes using 2 different sockets.  If this isn't
working properly, then there's a bug in TIPC we need to fix.  However,
it may also be that your software isn't using TIPC properly -- this sort
of thing has happened before.

Can you supply us with more information about exactly how you're using
TIPC sockets?  TIPC works differently depending on the type of socket
being used (SOCK_DGRAM, SOCK_RDM, SOCK_STREAM, or SOCK_SEQPACKET), the
type of addressing being used (TIPC name vs. TIPC port id), and the type
of distribution being used (unicast or multicast).  Sample code would be
extremely helpful in allowing us to spot design or coding problems, or
to try reproducing your problem.

Regards,
Al=20

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ming Sun (xiansun) [mailto:xi...@ci...]=20
> Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 1:11 PM
> To: Stephens, Allan; Randy MacLeod
> Cc: tip...@li...
> Subject: RE: [tipc-discussion] Multiple socket supported?
>=20
> Hi Al,
>=20
> I am using the latest 1.7.5 plus the 1.7.5 patch.
> The problem is as following. I have 3 single threaded processes.
> Two will communicates with the third. The third process opens=20
> two receiving sockets one for each to the others. The third=20
> process seem receiving message from the first process that=20
> register to the topology server and receive message from it.
> But the message from the other process is not received.
> Some times it receives message from both. But once the first=20
> and second process die and come back. It will receive message=20
> from only one of them. The sendto successes but the message=20
> is not received. I just guess TIPC does not support two=20
> receiving sockets or not yet support.
>=20
> Thanks,
>=20
> Ming
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephens, Allan [mailto:all...@wi...]
> Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 5:36 AM
> To: Randy MacLeod; Ming Sun (xiansun)
> Cc: tip...@li...
> Subject: RE: [tipc-discussion] Multiple socket supported?
>=20
> It would also help to know what version of TIPC Ming is=20
> using.  The socket code has been improved in the TIPC 1.7=20
> stream, which fixed a number of bugs.
>=20
> Regards,
> Al=20
>=20
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: tip...@li...
> > [mailto:tip...@li...] On Behalf Of=20
> > Randy MacLeod
> > Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 12:28 AM
> > To: Ming Sun (xiansun)
> > Cc: tip...@li...
> > Subject: Re: [tipc-discussion] Multiple socket supported?
> >=20
> > On Dec 13, 2007 9:25 PM, Ming Sun (xiansun)=20
> <xi...@ci...> wrote:
> > >
> > > I tried to create multiple RDM sockets and use different nameseq=20
> > > addresses to receive message from different sources with select.
> > > But it is seems not reliable receive message from all
> > sources once the
> > > sender goes down and back up.
> >=20
> >   What exactly do you mean by "sender goes downa and back up"?
> > How do  you know that messages appear to be dropped?
> >=20
> > > Is multiple receiving  socket in one thread supported?
> >=20
> > Yes.
> >=20
> > If you have a server which binds addresses A, B, C to three=20
> separate=20
> > sockets then you will be able to call select() and receive messages.
> > There is the usual limitation that if you are doing connectionless=20
> > messaging, you have to do flow-control in your application code to=20
> > avoid message drops if the server should fall too far behind.
> >=20
> > If this doesn't help maybe you could post your test code.
> >=20
> > --
> > // Randy
> >=20
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > -----------
> > SF.Net email is sponsored by:
> > Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
> > It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything=20
> > Open Source.
> > http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.n
> > et/marketplace
> > _______________________________________________
> > tipc-discussion mailing list
> > tip...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tipc-discussion
> >=20
>=20