[Spread-users] problem re-using private names with 3.17.0
yairamir at cnds.jhu.edu
Sun Oct 27 19:02:07 EST 2002
I just want to make one thing clear.
If you disconnect and immediately connect with the same name, it is
very likely to get the not-unique rejection and this is perfectly
normal and is the intended outcome (and not a bug).
Upon disconnection, Spread passes a safe message to let everyone knows
that this guy disconnected and only upon delivery of this message it
actually clears this guy out. In the meantime, connecting with the
same name will be rejected. Usually this should take a small amount of
time, very likely less than a second in local area networks.
>From the previous description I understand it takes sometimes over 5
minutes on 3.17.0 which means to me that probably Spread never clears the name
at some situations. If this is correct, it is absolutely a bug.
Tim> [Yair Amir, on Jeremy's connect/disconnect/connect woes]
>> That was my first reaction to Jeremy's message.
>> However, reading it more carefully, you see that he means
>> that Spread does not allow him to use the same private name
>> AFTER the previous process that used the name already disconnected.
>> If this is true, it is definitely a bug. I know Jonathan
>> is looking into this.
Tim> Great. In context, we have a Spread-based app with a large test suite, and
Tim> the setup and teardown methods for the individual tests routinely reuse the
Tim> same set of private names, establishing a new connection(s) in the setup and
Tim> disconnecting in the teardown. Other parts of the tests rely on those
Tim> names. The tests all passed under 3.16.2, but started suffering massive
Tim> "Connection rejected -- name not unique" failures when Jeremy tried 3.17.0.
Tim> I'm surprised that he can still write C code <wink>.
More information about the Spread-users