Actually, there may be *several* problems with implementing connection timeouts in terms of socket timeouts. The first problem is that the connection timeout may not be honored correctly (i.e. it can be exceeded); the second problem is that the connection timeout and the socket timeout proper might not actually be independently configurable. I was reviewing some code I have that configures a synchronous Apache client, and I realized that I'm calling `PoolingHttpClientConnectionManagerBuilder#setDefaultSocketConfig` in order to configure a TLS handshake timeout. There's a comment assuring me that this timeout *only* applies to connection initialization and not request execution, but really either behavior is surprising.
TLS handshake timeouts have been discussed previously here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HTTPCLIENT-1478 On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 12:29 PM Ryan Schmitt <rschm...@pobox.com> wrote: > > It very well may come down to documentation for the most part, > although I am curious what you think about the problems associated > with implementing connection timeouts in terms of socket timeouts. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@hc.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@hc.apache.org
