Issue882297
This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
Created on 2004-01-22 18:36 by jemfinch, last changed 2022-04-11 14:56 by admin. This issue is now closed.
Messages (5) | |||
---|---|---|---|
msg19786 - (view) | Author: Jeremy Fincher (jemfinch) | Date: 2004-01-22 18:36 | |
Ok, here's what I did: >>> import socket >>> s = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM) >>> s.bind(('', 9009)) >>> s.listen(5) >>> s.accept() Now, I opened a second Python interpreter in which I typed this: >>> import socket >>> s = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM) >>> s.connect(('localhost', 9009)) In the first interpreter I did this: >>> s.accept() (<socket._socketobject object at 0x40163e14>, ('127.0.0.1', 33059)) >>> s1 = _[0] >>> s1.settimeout(3) >>> fd = s1.makefile() Then I tested that the timeout worked correctly. Still in the first interpreter: >>> fd.readline() Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in ? File "/usr/local/lib/python2.3/socket.py", line 338, in readline data = self._sock.recv(self._rbufsize) socket.timeout: timed out >>> fd.readline() Now, while that was blocking, I did this in the second interpreter: >>> s.send('foo') 3 Which caused this in the first interpreter (as expected, since I didn't send a newline): Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in ? File "/usr/local/lib/python2.3/socket.py", line 338, in readline data = self._sock.recv(self._rbufsize) socket.timeout: timed out >>> fd.readline() While that was blocking, I did this in the second interpreter: >>> s.send('bar\n') 4 Finally sending a newline. But lo and behold! In the first interpreter I got this: >>> fd.readline() 'bar\n' Alas, my 'foo' has been lost! Anyway, the documentation does explicitly state that the socket should be in blocking mode, *implying* that it does no buffering, but it doesn't say anything about timeouts. Ideally, the file object would buffer enough data until the readline could return meaningfully, but failing that, the documentation should probably be updated to mention that timeouts shouldn't be used with readline on the returned file object. |
|||
msg19787 - (view) | Author: John J Lee (jjlee) | Date: 2006-02-01 19:38 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=261020 I believe this was fixed in socket.py in rev 32056, closing bug 707074. |
|||
msg19788 - (view) | Author: Georg Brandl (georg.brandl) * | Date: 2006-02-17 12:10 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=1188172 If this is a bug, it hasn't been fixed. I reproduced it here. Assigning to Skip since he worked on "makefile" as it seems. |
|||
msg19789 - (view) | Author: Skip Montanaro (skip.montanaro) * | Date: 2007-03-11 18:46 | |
Okay, this is the socket.makefile/timeout bug report. Sorry about the previous blip. |
|||
msg19790 - (view) | Author: Facundo Batista (facundobatista) * | Date: 2007-03-21 19:45 | |
From the makefile documentation: "The socket must be in blocking mode". If the socket is in blocking mode, it can NOT have a timeout. I fixed the docs, and made that explicit. Regards, |
History | |||
---|---|---|---|
Date | User | Action | Args |
2022-04-11 14:56:02 | admin | set | github: 39855 |
2004-01-22 18:36:33 | jemfinch | create |