Search Results

Search found 19 results on 1 pages for 'iocp'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

• C++ Windows IOCP - HTTP POST data missing

  - by Mike Trader

  I have written a very simple IOCP HTTP server that works for the GET verb, but not POST. I create a socket and a listen thread in which accept() is waiting for a connection. When a client connects I call ioctlsocket() to unblock the socket then I associate the socket with IOCP and finally call WSARecv() to read the data. Some data is indeed read and when that has happened, IOCP wakes up a worker thread via GetQueuedCompletionStatus() and I recover the request data. I only ever get the request header when I POST from any browser. Any suggestions as to why? I am assuming the IOCP completes when ALL the data has arrived from TCP?

  Read the article

• Multithreaded IOCP Client Issue

  - by Carl

  I am writing a multithreaded client that uses an IO Completion Port. I create and connect the socket that has the WSA_FLAG_OVERLAPPED attribute set. if ((m_socket = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_TCP)) == INVALID_SOCKET) { throw std::exception("Failed to create socket."); } if (WSAConnectByName(m_socket, L"server.com", L"80", &localAddressLength, reinterpret_cast<sockaddr*>(&localAddress), &remoteAddressLength, &remoteAddress, NULL, NULL) == FALSE) { throw std::exception("Failed to connect."); } I associate the IO Completion Port with the socket. if ((m_hIOCP = CreateIoCompletionPort(reinterpret_cast<HANDLE>(m_socket), m_hIOCP, NULL, 8)) == NULL) { throw std::exception("Failed to create IOCP object."); } All appears to go well until I try to send some data over the socket. SocketData* socketData = new SocketData; socketData->hEvent = 0; DWORD bytesSent = 0; if (WSASend(m_socket, socketData->SetBuffer(socketData->GenerateLoginRequestHeader()), 1, &bytesSent, NULL, reinterpret_cast<OVERLAPPED*>(socketData), NULL) == SOCKET_ERROR && WSAGetLastError() != WSA_IO_PENDING) { throw std::exception("Failed to send data."); } Instead of returning SOCKET_ERROR with the last error set to WSA_IO_PENDING, WSASend returns immediately. I need the IO to pend and for it's completion to be handled in my thread function which is also my worker thread. unsigned int __stdcall MyClass::WorkerThread(void* lpThis) { } I've done this before but I don't know what is going wrong in this case, I'd greatly appreciate any efforts in helping me fix this problem.

  Read the article

• An IOCP documentation interpretation question - buffer ownership ambiguity

  - by Poni

  Since I'm not a native English speaker I might be missing something so maybe someone here knows better than me. Taken from WSASend's doumentation at MSDN: lpBuffers [in] A pointer to an array of WSABUF structures. Each WSABUF structure contains a pointer to a buffer and the length, in bytes, of the buffer. For a Winsock application, once the WSASend function is called, the system owns these buffers and the application may not access them. This array must remain valid for the duration of the send operation. Ok, can you see the bold text? That's the unclear spot! I can think of two translations for this line (might be something else, you name it): Translation 1 - "buffers" refers to the OVERLAPPED structure that I pass this function when calling it. I may reuse the object again only when getting a completion notification about it. Translation 2 - "buffers" refer to the actual buffers, those with the data I'm sending. If the WSABUF object points to one buffer, then I cannot touch this buffer until the operation is complete. Can anyone tell what's the right interpretation to that line? And..... If the answer is the second one - how would you resolve it? Because to me it implies that for each and every data/buffer I'm sending I must retain a copy of it at the sender side - thus having MANY "pending" buffers (in different sizes) on an high traffic application, which really going to hurt "scalability". Statement 1: In addition to the above paragraph (the "And...."), I thought that IOCP copies the data to-be-sent to it's own buffer and sends from there, unless you set SO_SNDBUF to zero. Statement 2: I use stack-allocated buffers (you know, something like char cBuff[1024]; at the function body - if the translation to the main question is the second option (i.e buffers must stay as they are until the send is complete), then... that really screws things up big-time! Can you think of a way to resolve it? (I know, I asked it in other words above).

  Read the article

• IOCP multiple socket completionports in same container

  - by Ohmages

  For the past couple of days I have been thinking about how to solve one of my problems I am facing, and I have tried to research the topic but don't really know what I can do. I have 2 sockets in the same struct that both have the same completionport. Problem is, they both use different protocols. Is there a way that I can find out which socket got triggered? Their called game_socket, and client_socket Example code would be something like... while (true) { error = GetQueuedCompletionStatus(CompletionPort, &BytesTransfered, (PULONG_PTR)&Key, &lpOverlapped, 0); srvc = CONTAINING_RECORD ( lpOverlapped, client , ol ); if ( error == TRUE ) { cout << endl << "SOCKET: [" << srvc->client_socket << "] TRIGGERED - WORKER THREAD" << endl; cout << endl << "BytesTransfered: [" << BytesTransfered << "]" << endl; if ( srvc->game_client triggered ) { // .. this code } else { // .. this code } Any ideas our help would be appreciated :)

  Read the article

• Is is possible to use IOCP (or other API) in Reactor-style operations?

  - by Artyom

  Hello, Is there any scalable Win32 API (like IOCP not like select) that gives you reactor style operations on sockets? AFAIK IOCP allows you to receive notification on completed operations like data read or written (proactor) but I'm looking for reactor style of operations: I need to get notification when the socket is readable or writable (reactor). Something similar to epoll, kqueue, /dev/poll ? Is there such API in Win32? If so where can I find a manual on it? Clearification: I need select like api for sockets that is as scalable as IOCP, or I'm looking for a way to use IOCP in reactor like operations.

  Read the article

• Is is possible to use IOCP (or other API) in reactor stle operations?

  - by Artyom

  Hello, Is there any scalable Win32 API (like IOCP not like select) that gives you reactor style operations on sockets? AFAIK IOCP allows you to receive notification on completed operations like data read or written (proactor) but I'm looking for reactor style of operations: I need to get notification when the socket is readable or writable (reactor). Something similar to epoll, kqueue, /dev/poll ? Is there such API in Win32? If so where can I find a manual on it?

  Read the article

• IO completion port key confusion

  - by Richard Tew

  I'm writing an IO completion port based server (source code here) using the Windows DLL API in Python using the ctypes module. But this is a pretty direct usage of the API and this question is directed at those who have a knowledge of IOCP, not Python. As I understand the documentation for CreateIoCompletionPort, you specify your "user defined" completion key when you call this function with a file handle (in my case a socket) you are associating with the created IOCP. When you get around to calling GetQueuedCompletionStatus, you get a completion key value along with a pointer to an overlapped object. The completion key should identify what overlapped object and request has completed. However, let's say I pass in 100 as the completion key in my CreateIoCompletionPort call with an overlapped object. When the same overlapped object has its IO completed and it arrives back through GetQueuedCompletionStatus, the completion key that accompanies it is much larger and bares no resemblance to the original value of 100. Am I misunderstanding how the completion key works, or must I be doing it wrong in the source code I linked above?

  Read the article

• some OVERLAPS using WSASend not returning in a timely manner using GetQueuedCompletionStatus?

  - by Geoffrey

  Background: I'm using CreateIoCompletionPort, WSASend/Recv, and GetQueuedCompletionStatus to do overlapped socket io on my server. For flow control, when sending to the client, I only allow several WSASend() to be called when all pending OVERLAPs have popped off the IOCP. Problem: Recently, there are occassions when the OVERLAPs do not get returned to the IOCP. The thread calling GetQueuedCompletionStatus does not get them and they remain in my local pending queue. I've verified that the client DOES receive the data off the socket and the socket is connected. No errors were returned when the WSASend() calls were made. The OVERLAPs simply "never" come back without an external stimulus like the following: Disconnecting the socket from the client or server, immediately allows the GetQueuedCompletionStatus thread to retrieve the OVERLAPs Making additional calls to WSASend(), sometimes several are needed, before all the OVERLAPs suddenly pop off the queue. Question: Has anyone seen this type of behavior? Any ideas on what is causing this? Thanks, Geoffrey

  Read the article

• Is there a I/O completion port based component for Delphi?

  - by dmauric.mp

  I am aware of Indy, ICS, Synapse and Clever InetSuite, none of which support IOCP. Is there anything else out there? Edit: I found iocpclasses , It's written in Delphi5. Better than nothing I suppose.

  Read the article

• WSASend() with more than one buffer - could complete incomplete?

  - by Poni

  Say I post the following WSASend call (Windows I/O completion ports without callback functions): void send_data() { WSABUF wsaBuff[2]; wsaBuff[0].len = 20; wsaBuff[1].len = 25; WSASend(sock, &wsaBuff[0], 2, ......); } When I get the "write_done" notification from the completion port, is it possible that wsaBuff[1] will be sent completely (25 bytes) yet wsaBuff[0] will be only partially sent (say 7 bytes)?

  Read the article

• Linux and I/O completion ports?

  - by someguy

  Using winsock, you can configure sockets or seperate I/O operations to "overlap". This means that calls to perform I/O are returned immediately, while the actual operations are completed asynchronously by separate worker threads. Winsock also provides "completion ports". From what I understand, a completion port acts as a multiplexer of handles (sockets). A handle can be demultiplexed if it isn't in the middle of an I/O operation, i.e. if all its I/O operations are completed. So, on to my question... does linux support completion ports or even asynchronous I/O for sockets?

  Read the article

• Microsoft soutient Node.js et participe au développement de la bibliothèque JavaScript client/serveur

  Microsoft soutient Node.js Et participe au développement de la bibliothèque JavaScript client / serveur Sur le blog interoperability Claudio Caldato (Principal Program Manager of Interoperability Srategy Team) annonce que Microsoft va participer au développement d'une version Windows de Node.js Le premier objectif consistera à ajouter à Node une API IOCP Windows performante. Cette phase initiale achevée, un programme exécutable (node.exe) sera disponible sur le site nodejs.org et Node.js fonctionnera alors sur Win...

  Read the article

• Akka react vs receive

  - by Will I Am

  I am reading my way through Akka tutorials, but I'd like to get my feet wet with a real-life scenario. I'd like to write both a connectionless UDP server (an echo/ping-pong service) and a TCP server (also an echo service, but it keeps the connection open after it replies). My first question is, is this a good experimental use case for Akka, or am I better served with more common paradigms like IOCP? Would you do something like this with Akka in production? Although I understand conceptually the difference between react() and receive(), I struggle to choose one or the other for the two models. In the UDP model, there is no concept of who the sender is on the server, once the pong is sent, so should I use receive()? In the TCP model, the connection is maintained on the server after the pong, so should I use react()? If someone could give me some guidance, and maybe an opinion on how you'd design these two use cases, it would take me a long way. I have found a number of examples, but they didn't have explanations as to why they chose the paradigms they did.

  Read the article

• My server app works strangely. What could be the reason(s)?

  - by Poni

  Hi! I've written a server app (two parts actually; proxy server and a game server) using C++ (board game). It uses IOCP as the sockets interface. For that app I've also written a "client simulator" (hereafter "client") app that spawns many client connections, where each of them plays, in very high speed, getting the CPU to be 100% utilized. So, that's how it goes in terms of topology: Game server - holds the game state. Real players do not connect it directly but through the proxy server. When a player joins a game, the proxy actually asks for it on behalf of that player, and the game server spawns a "player instance" for that player, and from now on, every notification between the game server and the player is being passed through the proxy. Proxy server - holds TCP connections with the real players. Players communicate with the game server through it only. Client simulator - connects to the proxy only. When running the server (again, it's actually two server apps) & client locally it all works just fine. I'm talking about 40k+ player instances in which all of them are active in a game. On the other hand, when running the server remotely with, say, 1000 clients who play things getting strange. For example, I run it as said above. Then with Task Manager I kill the client simulator app ("End Process Tree"). Then it seems like the buffer of the remote server got modified by another thread, or in other words, a memory corruption has been occurred. The server crashes because it got an unknown message id (it's a custom protocol where each message has it's own unique number). To make things clear, here is how I run the apps: PC1 - game server and clients simulator (because the clients will connect the proxy). PC2 - proxy server. The strangest thing is this: Only the remote side gets "corrupted". Remote in terms that it's not the PC I use to code the app (VC++ 2008). Let's call the PC I use to code the apps "PC1". Now for example, if this time I ran the game server on PC1 (it means that proxy server on PC2 and clients simulator on PC1), then the proxy server crashes with an "unknown message id" error. Another variation is when I run the proxy server on PC1 (again, the dev machine), the game server and the clients simulator on PC2, then the game server on PC2 gets crashed. As for the IOCP config: The servers' internal connections use the default receive/send buffer sizes. Tried even with setting them to 1MB, but no luck. I have three PCs in total; 2 x Vista 64bit <<-- one of those is the dev machine. The other is connected through WiFi. 1 x WinXP 32bit They're all connected in a "full duplex" manner. What could be the reason? Tried about everything; Stack tracing, recording some actions (like read/write logging).. I want to stress that only the PC I'm not using to code the apps crashes (actually the server app "role" which is running on it - sometimes the game server and sometimes the proxy server). At first I thought that maybe the wireless PC has problems (it's wireless..) but: TCP has it's own mechanisms to make sure the packet is delivered properly. Also, a crash also happens when trying it with the two PCs that are physically connected (Vista vs. XP). Another option is that the Windows DLLs versions might have problems, but then again, one of the tests is Vista vs. Vista, and the other is Vista vs. XP. Any idea?

  Read the article

• Limiting TCP sends with a "to-be-sent" queue and other design issues.

  - by Poni

  Hello all! This question is the result of two other questions I've asked in the last few days. I'm creating a new question because I think it's related to the "next step" in my understanding of how to control the flow of my send/receive, something I didn't get a full answer to yet. The other related questions are: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3028376/an-iocp-documentation-interpretation-question-buffer-ownership-ambiguity http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3028998/non-blocking-tcp-buffer-issues In summary, I'm using Windows I/O Completion Ports. I have several threads that process notifications from the completion port. I believe the question is platform-independent and would have the same answer as if to do the same thing on a *nix, *BSD, Solaris system. So, I need to have my own flow control system. Fine. So I send send and send, a lot. How do I know when to start queueing the sends, as the receiver side is limited to X amount? Let's take an example (closest thing to my question): FTP protocol. I have two servers; One is on a 100Mb link and the other is on a 10Mb link. I order the 100Mb one to send to the other one (the 10Mb linked one) a 1GB file. It finishes with an average transfer rate of 1.25MB/s. How did the sender (the 100Mb linked one) knew when to hold the sending, so the slower one wouldn't be flooded? Another way to ask this: Can I get a "hold-your-sendings" notification from the remote side? Is it built-in in TCP or the so called "reliable network protocol" needs me to do so? Again, I have a loop with many sends to a remote server, and at some point, within that loop I'll have to determine if I should queue that send or I can pass it on to the transport layer (TCP). How do I do that? What would you do? Of course that when I get a completion notification from IOCP that the send was done I'll issue other pending sends, that's clear. Another design question related to this: Since I am to use a custom buffers with a send queue, and these buffers are being freed to be reused (thus not using the "delete" keyword) when a "send-done" notification has been arrived, I'll have to use a mutual exlusion on that buffer pool. Using a mutex slows things down, so I've been thinking; Why not have each thread have its own buffers pool, thus accessing it , at least when getting the required buffers for a send operation, will require no mutex, because it belongs to that thread only. The buffers pool is located at the thread local storage (TLS) level. No mutual pool implies no lock needed, implies faster operations BUT also implies more memory used by the app, because even if one thread already allocated 1000 buffers, the other one that is sending right now and need 1000 buffers to send something will need to allocated these to its own. This is a long question and I hope none got hurt (: Thank you all!

  Read the article

• Buffer management for socket application best practice

  - by Poni

  Having a Windows IOCP app............ I understand that for async i/o operation (on network) the buffer must remain valid for the duration of the send/read operation. So for each connection I have one buffer for the reading. For sending I use buffers to which I copy the data to be sent. When the sending operation completes I release the buffer so it can be reused. So far it's nice and not of a big issue. What remains unclear is how do you guys do this? Another thing is that even when having things this way, I mean multi-buffers, the receiver side might be flooded (talking from experience) with data. Even setting SO_RCVBUF to 25MB didn't help in my testings. So what should I do? Have a to-be-sent queue?

  Read the article

• Non-blocking TCP buffer issues.

  - by Poni

  Hi! I think I'm in a problem. I have two TCP apps connected to each other which use winsock I/O completion ports to send/receive data (non-blocking sockets). Everything works just fine until there's a data transfer burst. The sender starts sending incorrect/malformed data. I allocate the buffers I'm sending on the stack, and if I understand correctly, that's a wrong to do, because these buffers should remain as I sent them until I get the "write complete" notification from IOCP. Take this for example: void some_function() { char cBuff[1024]; // filling cBuff with some data WSASend(...); // sending cBuff, non-blocking mode // filling cBuff with other data WSASend(...); // again, sending cBuff // ..... and so forth! } If I understand correctly, each of these WSASend() calls should have its own unique buffer, and that buffer can be reused only when the send completes. Correct? Now, what strategies can I implement in order to maintain a big sack of such buffers, how should I handle them, how can I avoid performance penalty, etc'? And, if I am to use buffers that means I should copy the data to be sent from the source buffer to the temporary one, thus, I'd set SO_SNDBUF on each socket to zero, so the system will not re-copy what I already copied. Are you with me? Please let me know if I wasn't clear.

  Read the article

• Non-blocking TCP connection issues.

  - by Poni

  Hi! I think I'm in a problem. I have two TCP apps connected to each other which use winsock I/O completion ports to send/receive data (non-blocking sockets). Everything works just fine until there's a data transfer burst. The sender starts sending incorrect/malformed data. I allocate the buffers I'm sending on the stack, and if I understand correctly, that's a wrong to do, because these buffers should remain as I sent them until I get the "write complete" notification from IOCP. Take this for example: void some_function() { char cBuff[1024]; // filling cBuff with some data WSASend(...); // sending cBuff, non-blocking mode // filling cBuff with other data WSASend(...); // again, sending cBuff // ..... and so forth! } If I understand correctly, each of these WSASend() calls should have its own unique buffer, and that buffer can be reused only when the send completes. Correct? Now, what strategies can I implement in order to maintain a big sack of such buffers, how should I handle them etc'? And, if I am to use buffers that means I should copy the data to be sent from the source buffer to the temporary one, thus, I'd set SO_SNDBUF on each socket to zero, so the system will not re-copy what I already copied. Are you with me? Please let me know if I wasn't clear.

  Read the article

• Design for fastest page download

  - by mexxican

  I have a file with millions of URLs/IPs and have to write a program to download the pages really fast. The connection rate should be at least 6000/s and file download speed at least 2000 with avg. 15kb file size. The network bandwidth is 1 Gbps. My approach so far has been: Creating 600 socket threads with each having 60 sockets and using WSAEventSelect to wait for data to read. As soon as a file download is complete, add that memory address(of the downloaded file) to a pipeline( a simple vector ) and fire another request. When the total download is more than 50Mb among all socket threads, write all the files downloaded to the disk and free the memory. So far, this approach has been not very successful with the rate at which I could hit not shooting beyond 2900 connections/s and downloaded data rate even less. Can somebody suggest an alternative approach which could give me better stats. Also I am working windows server 2008 machine with 8 Gig of memory. Also, do we need to hack the kernel so as we could use more threads and memory. Currently I can create a max. of 1500 threads and memory usage not going beyond 2 gigs [ which technically should be much more as this is a 64-bit machine ]. And IOCP is out of question as I have no experience in that so far and have to fix this application today. Thanks Guys!

  Read the article

1