[Spread-users] lost flooder messages

John Schultz jschultz at d-fusion.net
Fri May 9 16:14:46 EDT 2003

Kelvin Fedrick wrote:

> John Schultz wrote:
>     Could it be that Spread sometimes detects that you have left (broken
>     pipe) before it actually sends your msgs out to the other daemons and
>     therefore discards your msgs? This would explain all of the
>     symptoms. On
>     what kind of system are you running? On what kind of system is the
>     daemon running? What kind of communication are you using to the daemon
>     (TCP/IP remote or UNIX domain socket to local)?

Jonathan, Yair do you have any ideas why such behavior could be 
occurring? Could this be a operating system glitch where it drops msgs 
still in the OS buffers if the sending descriptor is closed "early?"

> We've experienced this in several different configuration including:
> - single daemon on Linux w/clients presumably using domain sockets 
> (whatever the standard test clients use)
> - single daemon on Linux w/remote client from either same Linux box, 
> different Linux box, or Windows XP
> - two daemons on different Linux boxes each with local client

Could you post your modified flooder to the list with instructions on 
how to run it? This way we can quickly reproduce and diagnose the 
problem you are describing.

>     BTW, Spread discarding your msgs like this, though not desirable, is
>     allowed by the safety and liveness properties of the system. To
>     gurantee
>     that all of your messages are actually sent in the system, the sender
>     must stay in the group until it receives back its own messages. You can
>     do this by making your flooder both a sender and a receiver.
> I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. In spread, a sender need 
> not even
> be a group member to multicast to it, so why would the sender be 
> required to
> stay in the group if it happened to be a member for a delivery 
> guarantee? Also,
> the default flooder is both a sender a receiver and that is exactly when 
> the problem
> occurs. It has not occurred when I use the -wo write-only flag. I would 
> assume
> (naively perhaps) that if SP_multicast returns with no error, the daemon 
> should
> have the message and deliver it no matter what then happens to the sender.
I was just pointing out that the hard gurantees (the safety and liveness 
properties) of the system technically could allow Spread to drop messages 
when it detects a sender "crash." By the properties, the only way the 

system is compelled to deliver a sender's messages is by the Self-Delivery 

property. This property states that the system must eventually deliver a 

sender's msg back to the sender if it doesn't crash.

There are no formulated hard gurantees about open group sends (sending to 

groups of which you are not a member). Practically speaking however, I'm sure 

Spread does a best effort sort of thing.


More information about the Spread-users mailing list