The following bit of code throws java.net.SocketTimeoutException: Accept timed out:
ServerSocket serverSocket = new ServerSocket(0, 1, InetAddress.getLocalHost());
serverSocket.setSoTimeout(6000);
serverSocket.accept();
I have tried changing everything I can in creating a ServerSocket but the error remains the same. Please guide me in what I'm missing here, if anything.
What your code is doing is listening for 6 seconds for incoming TCP/IP requests on port zero for the local host1.
Here are some reasons why you might get a SocketTimeoutException.
Nothing tries to connect to your service within the 6 second timeframe.
Something tries to connect, but it is trying to connect on the wrong port. (Port zero sounds to me like you are trying to accept requests on "any" port, and I think that is unlikely to work.)
There is a software or hardware firewall (or packet filter) that is preventing connection requests from reaching your application, or is blocking the replies.
1 - If you don't want that "only accept an exception if it arrives within 6 seconds" behaviour ... which strikes me as a bit odd ... you shouldn't set a timeout on the server socket object.
Related
This question already has answers here:
Java socket API: How to tell if a connection has been closed?
(9 answers)
Closed 2 years ago.
So I'm in the making of a very simple server/client complex using java. So far I have managed to figure out what happens if the client quits, because then the server receives null while listening from any input from the client.
BUT - what happens if the client is connected and the server quits for any reason... the server is supposed to wait for input from the client, but how can the client know that the server is not listening anymore? For me the clients call to the server just goes into the void... nothing happens...
Can I do something to find out when the server goes down? Time-out, ping/pong or something?
As You surely can see I'm quite new at this, I'm just curious. This was a puzzle for me ever since I attended computer science at the university.
Thanks in advance. dr_xemacs.
(I am assuming you are working with blocking server socket and socket and not with non blocking ones)
Similarly to the server, reading from streams of a closed connection will return null.
However if you instead do not want to rely on this or a scared that the connection to the server could somehow persist, you can also use time outs (check this out! ) which will throw SocketTimeoutException when the time is up and, to keep track of whether the server is up or not, create a ping/packet to assure server is still up and running.
Edit: I did a quick search and this could be useful to you! Take a look!
How can the client know that the server is not listening anymore?
If the client doesn't attempt to interact at some level with the service, it won't know.
Assuming that the client has sent a request, a few different scenarios.
If the service is no longer listening on the designated port, the client will typically get a "Connection Refused" exception.
If the service is still running (in a sense) but it is not working properly, then connection attempts from the client are likely to time out.
If the service's host is down, the client liable get a timeout.
If there are network connectivity or firewall issues, the client could get a timeout or some other exception.
Can I do something to find out when the server goes down? Time-out, ping/pong or something?
You attempt to connect and send a request. If it fails or times out, that means the service is down. If you are designing and implementing the service yourself, you could include a special "healthcheck" request for clients to "ping" on. But the flip-side is that network and server resources will be consumed in receiving and responding to these requests. It can affect your ability to scale up the number of clients, for example, if each client pings the service every N seconds.
But a client typically doesn't need to know whether the service is up or down. It typically only cares that service responds when it it sends a real request. And the simplest way to handle that is to just send the request and deal with the outcome. (The client code has to deal with all possible outcomes anyway when doing a real request. The service can go down, etc between the last healthcheck ping and when the client sends a real request.)
Bottom line: Don't bother with checking availability in the client unless the application (i.e. the end user) really needs to know.
Your Server probably may be running on a certain port and so you can add a health check at the client side and update a global flag with status to let client know about its availibity :-
Socket socket = null;
try
{
socket = new Socket(host, port);
return true;
}
catch (Exception e)
{
return false;
}
finally
{
if(socket != null)
try
{
socket.close();
}
catch(Exception e){}
}
I have a certain piece of code that integrates with a third party using HTTP connection, which handles socket timeout and connection timeout differently.
I have been trying to simulate and test all the scenarios which could arise from the third party. was able to test connection timeout by connecting to a port which is blocked by the servers firewall e.g. port 81.
However I'm unable to simulate a socket timeout. If my understanding is not wrong socket timeout is associated with continuous packet flow, and the connection dropping in between. Is there a way I can simulate this?
So we are talking about to kinds of timeouts here, one is to connect to the server (connect timeout), the other timeout will happen when no data is send or received via the socket for a while (idle timeout).
Node sockets have a socket timeout, that can be used to synthesize both the connect and the idle timeout. This can be done by setting the socket timeout to the connect timeout and then when connected, setting it to the idle timeout.
example:
const request = http.request(url, {
timeout: connectTimeout,
});
request.setTimeout(idleTimeout);
This works because the timeout in the options is set immediately when creating the socket, the setTimeout function is run on the socket when connected!
Anyway, the question was about how to test the connect timeout. Ok so let's first park the idle timeout. We can simply test that by not sending any data for some time, that would cause the timeout. Check!
The connect timeout is a bit harder to test, the first thing that comes to mind is that we need a place to connect to that will not error, but also not connect. This would cause a timeout. But how the hell do we simulate that, in node?
If we think a little bit outside the box then we might figure out that this timeout is about the time it takes to connect. It does not matter why the connection takes as long as it does. We simply need to delay the time it takes to connect. This is not necessarily a server thing, we could also do it on the client. After all this is the part connecting, if we can delay it there, we can test the timeout.
So how could we delay the connection on the client side? Well, we can use the DNS lookup for that. Before the connection is made, a DNS lookup is done. If we simply delay that by 5 seconds or so we can test for the connect timeout very easily.
This is what the code could look like:
import * as dns from "dns";
import * as http from "http";
const url = new URL("http://localhost:8080");
const request = http.request(url, {
timeout: 3 * 1000, // connect timeout
lookup(hostname, options, callback) {
setTimeout(
() => dns.lookup(hostname, options, callback),
5 * 1000,
);
},
});
request.setTimeout(10 * 1000); // idle timeout
request.addListener("timeout", () => {
const message = !request.socket || request.socket.connecting ?
`connect timeout while connecting to ${url.href}` :
`idle timeout while connected to ${url.href}`;
request.destroy(new Error(message));
});
In my projects I usually use an agent that I inject. The agent then has the delayed lookup. Like this:
import * as dns from "dns";
import * as http from "http";
const url = new URL("http://localhost:8080");
const agent = new http.Agent({
lookup(hostname, options, callback) {
setTimeout(
() => dns.lookup(hostname, options, callback),
5 * 1000,
);
},
});
const request = http.request(url, {
timeout: 3 * 1000, // connect timeout
agent,
});
request.setTimeout(10 * 1000); // idle timeout
request.addListener("timeout", () => {
const message = !request.socket || request.socket.connecting ?
`connect timeout while connecting to ${url.href}` :
`idle timeout while connected to ${url.href}`;
request.destroy(new Error(message));
});
Happy coding!
"Connection timeout" determines how long it may take for a TCP connection to be established and this all happens before any HTTP related data is send over the line. By connecting to a blocked port, you have only partially tested the connection timeout since no connection was being made. Typically, a TCP connection on your local network is created (established) very fast. But when connecting to a server on the other side of the world, establishing a TCP connection can take seconds.
"Socket timeout" is a somewhat misleading name - it just determines how long you (the client) will wait for an answer (data) from the server. In other words, how long the Socket.read() function will block while waiting for data.
Properly testing these functions involves creating a server socket or a (HTTP) web-server that you can modify to be very slow. Describing how to create and use a server socket for connection timeout testing (if that is possible) is too much to answer here, but socket timeout testing is a common question - see for example here (I just googled "mock web server for testing timeouts") which leads to a tool like MockWebServer. "MockWebServer" might have an option for testing connection timeouts as well (I have not used "MockWebServer"), but if not, another tool might have.
On a final note: it is good you are testing your usage of the third-party HTTP library with respect to timeout settings, even if this takes some effort. The worst that can happen is that a socket timeout setting in your code is somehow not used by the library and the default socket timeout of "wait forever" is used. That can result in your application doing absolutely nothing ("hanging") for no apparent reason.
I am trying to set the timeout of a connection on the client socket in Java. I have set the connection timeout to 2000 milliseconds, i.e:
this.socket.connect(this.socketAdd, timeOut);
This I am trying on a web application. When a user makes a request, I am passing values to socket server, but if I don't receive any response in 5 secs the socket should disconnect.
But in my case the whole request is getting submitted once again. Can any one please tell me where am I going wrong?
I want to cut the socket connection, if I don't get any response in 5 secs. How can I set it? Any sample code would help.
You can try the follwoing:
Socket client = new Socket();
client.connect(new InetSocketAddress(hostip, port_num), connection_time_out);
To put the whole thing together:
Socket socket = new Socket();
// This limits the time allowed to establish a connection in the case
// that the connection is refused or server doesn't exist.
socket.connect(new InetSocketAddress(host, port), timeout);
// This stops the request from dragging on after connection succeeds.
socket.setSoTimeout(timeout);
What you show is a timeout for the connection, this will timeout if it cannot connect within a certain time.
Your question implies you want a timeout for when you are already connected and send a request, you want to timeout if there is no response within a certain amount of time.
Presuming you mean the latter, then you need to timeout the socket.read() which can be done by setting SO_TIMEOUT with the Socket.setSoTimeout(int timeout) method. This will throw an exception if the read takes longer than the number of milliseconds specified. For example:
this.socket.setSoTimeout(timeOut);
An alternative method is to do the read in a thread, and then wait on the thread with a timeout and close the socket if it timesout.
I am getting below error when I am trying to connect to a TCP server. My programs tries to open around 300-400 connections using diffferent threads and this is happening during 250th thread. Each thread uses its own connection to send and receive data.
java.net.SocketException: Connection timed out:could be due to invalid address
at java.net.PlainSocketImpl.doConnect(PlainSocketImpl.java:372)
at java.net.PlainSocketImpl.connectToAddress(PlainSocketImpl.java:233)
at java.net.PlainSocketImpl.connect(PlainSocketImpl.java:220)
at java.net.SocksSocketImpl.connect(SocksSocketImpl.java:385)
Here is the code I have that a thread uses to get socket:
socket = new Socket(my_hostName, my_port);
Is there any default limit on number of connections that a TCP server can have at one time? If not how to solve this type of problems?
You could be getting a connection timeout if the server has a ServerSocket bound to the port you are connecting to, but is not accepting the connection.
If it always happens with the 250th connection, maybe the server is set up to only accept 250 connections. Someone has to disconnect so you can connect. Or you can increase the timeout; instead of creating the socket like that, create the socket with the empty constructor and then use the connect() method:
Socket s = new Socket();
s.connect(new InetSocketAddress(my_hostName, my_port), 90000);
Default connection timeout is 30 seconds; the code above waits 90 seconds to connect, then throws the exception if the connection cannot be established.
You could also set a lower connection timeout and do something else when you catch that exception...
Why all the connections? Is this a test program? In which case be aware that opening large numbers of connections from a single client stresses the client in ways that aren't exercised by real systems with large numbers of different client hosts, so test results from that kind of client aren't all that valid. You could be running out of client ports, or some other client resource.
If it isn't a test program, same question. Why all the connections? You'd be better off running a connection pool and reusing a much smaller number of connections serially. The network only has so much bandwidth after all; dividing it by 400 isn't very useful.
I'm implementing a java TCP/IP Server using ServerSocket to accept messages from clients via network sockets.
Works fine, except for clients on PDAs (a WIFI barcode scanner).
If I have a connection between server and pda - and the pda goues into suspend (standby) after some idle time - then there will be problems with the connection.
When the pda wakes up again, I can observer in a tcp monitor, that a second connection with a different port is established, but the old one remains established too:
localhost:2000 remotehost:4899 ESTABLISHED (first connection)
localhost:2000 remotehost:4890 ESTABLISHED (connection after wakeup)
And now communication doesn't work, as the client now uses the new connection, but the server still listens at the old one - so the server doesn't receive the messages. But when the server sends a message to the client he realizes the problem (receives a SocketException: Connection reset. The server then uses the new connection and all the messages which have been send in the meantime by the client will be received at a single blow!
So I first realize the network problems, when the server tries to send a message - but in the meantime there are no exceptions or anything. How can I properly react to this problem - so that the new connection is used, as soon as it is established (and the old one closed)?
From your description I guess that the server is structured like this:
server_loop
{
client_socket = server_socket.accept()
TalkToClientUntilConnectionCloses(client_socket)
}
I'd change it to process incoming connections and established connections in parallel. The simplest approach (from the implementation point of view) is to start a new thread for each client. It is not a good approach in general (it has poor scalability), but if you don't expect a lot of clients and can afford it, just change the server like this:
server_loop
{
client_socket = server_socket.accept()
StartClientThread(client_socket)
}
As a bonus, you get an ability to handle multiple clients simultaneously (and all the troubles attached too).
It sounds like the major issue is that you want the server to realize and drop the old connections as they become stale.
Have you considered setting a timeout on the connection on the server-side socket (the connection Socket, not the ServerSocket) so you can close/drop it after a certain period? Perhaps after the SO_TIMEOUT expires on the Socket, you could test it with an echo/keepalive command to verify that the connection is still good.