On Mon, 7 Oct 2024 09:00:28 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
>> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
>> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
>> clock. The existing `Timeout` test ha
On Mon, 7 Oct 2024 09:00:28 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
>> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
>> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
>> clock. The existing `Timeout` test ha
On Mon, 7 Oct 2024 09:00:28 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
>> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
>> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
>> clock. The existing `Timeout` test ha
On Mon, 7 Oct 2024 09:00:28 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
>> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
>> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
>> clock. The existing `Timeout` test ha
On Mon, 7 Oct 2024 09:00:28 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
>> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
>> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
>> clock. The existing `Timeout` test ha
> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
> clock. The existing `Timeout` test has also been updated to use the nano
> clock to measure obser
On Wed, 2 Oct 2024 13:38:17 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
>> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
>> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
>> clock. The existing `Timeout` test ha
> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
> clock. The existing `Timeout` test has also been updated to use the nano
> clock to measure obser
On Wed, 2 Oct 2024 13:25:54 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
> > I think that if there is a PortUnreachable thrown, during DnsClient.query
> > processing from the doUdpQuery, then the timeout may expire early ... if
> > I've interpreted the outer loop processing correctly
>
> The `DnsClient.query` m
On Wed, 2 Oct 2024 13:35:00 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
>> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
>> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
>> clock. The existing `Timeout` test ha
> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
> clock. The existing `Timeout` test has also been updated to use the nano
> clock to measure obser
On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 13:38:48 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> Aleksei Efimov has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Track unfulfilled timeouts during UDP queries.
>> Update exceptions handling.
>> Update TCP client to use nano ti
On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 20:30:57 GMT, Mark Sheppard wrote:
> I think that if there is a PortUnreachable thrown, during DnsClient.query
> processing from the doUdpQuery, then the timeout may expire early ... if I've
> interpreted the outer loop processing correctly
The `DnsClient.query` marks serve
On Thu, 19 Sep 2024 17:55:13 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
>> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
>> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
>> clock. The existing `Timeout` test h
On Thu, 19 Sep 2024 17:55:13 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
>> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
>> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
>> clock. The existing `Timeout` test h
On Thu, 19 Sep 2024 17:55:13 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
>> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
>> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
>> clock. The existing `Timeout` test h
> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
> clock. The existing `Timeout` test has also been updated to use the nano
> clock to measure obser
On Wed, 11 Sep 2024 16:27:29 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> 2 time is not too high,
>> I have presented, in the comment, a failures with the elapsed time is almost
>> twice the expected time
>> where the elapsed time is 14229 !! which is approx 1.84 * expected timeout
>
> @msheppar with the latest
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:01:54 GMT, Mark Sheppard wrote:
>> I agree that we don't want to document too much here. Updated the factor to
>> 1.75 (2 seems a bit high and might hide real issues), and to make the
>> timeout value calculation and check less arcane - I have updated test output
>> to p
On Wed, 11 Sep 2024 15:22:43 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
>> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
>> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
>> clock. The existing `Timeout` test h
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:01:54 GMT, Mark Sheppard wrote:
>> I agree that we don't want to document too much here. Updated the factor to
>> 1.75 (2 seems a bit high and might hide real issues), and to make the
>> timeout value calculation and check less arcane - I have updated test output
>> to p
> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
> clock. The existing `Timeout` test has also been updated to use the nano
> clock to measure obser
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 18:41:41 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
>> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
>> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
>> clock. The existing `Timeout` test h
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 18:38:15 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> I think 2 times is good, remove all potential noise ;-)
>>
>> the following failures is nearly twice the expected
>>
>> --System.out:(3/73)--
>> Skip local DNS Server creation
>> Elapsed (ms): 14229
>> Expected (ms): 77
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 14:47:26 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> src/jdk.naming.dns/share/classes/com/sun/jndi/dns/DnsClient.java line 443:
>>
>>> 441: // integer overflow (timeout is an int).
>>> 442: // no point in supporting timeout > Integer.MAX_VALUE,
>>> clamp if n
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 18:15:34 GMT, Mark Sheppard wrote:
>> I don't think it is a rabbit hole, to provide some additional clarity on the
>> timeout mechanism and to avoid any perception that it has absolute realtime
>> timeout semantics, such that developers have precise view of how the
>> mecha
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 14:54:58 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> Aleksei Efimov has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Measure time the caller spent waiting. Simplify timeoutLeft computation
>
> src/jdk.naming.dns/share/classes/com/sun/
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 17:54:30 GMT, Mark Sheppard wrote:
>> If I'm not mistaken here it's `Math.clamp(long, long, long)` which is
>> called - because `timeout * (1L << retry)` is a long. We could make it more
>> obvious by using `0L` instead of `0` too.
>
> thanks for the clarification ... yes i
> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
> clock. The existing `Timeout` test has also been updated to use the nano
> clock to measure obser
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 17:50:59 GMT, Mark Sheppard wrote:
>> I don't think we want to go down the rabbit hole of documenting too much.
>> Agreed that using a simple factor 2 would make the code simpler, but do we
>> want to go that high?
>
> I don't think it is a rabbit hole, to provide some addit
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 14:44:35 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> src/jdk.naming.dns/share/classes/com/sun/jndi/dns/DnsClient.java line 442:
>>
>>> 440: // use 1L below to ensure conversion to long and avoid
>>> potential
>>> 441: // integer overflow (timeout is an int).
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 14:59:44 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> test/jdk/com/sun/jndi/dns/ConfigTests/Timeout.java line 112:
>>
>>> 110: // Check that elapsed time is as long as expected, and
>>> 111: // not more than 67% greater. Given the min DNS timeout
>>> 112: /
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 09:49:08 GMT, Mark Sheppard wrote:
>> Aleksei Efimov has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Measure time the caller spent waiting. Simplify timeoutLeft computation
>
> test/jdk/com/sun/jndi/dns/ConfigTests/Ti
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 22:29:23 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
>> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
>> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
>> clock. The existing `Timeout` test ha
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 08:39:15 GMT, Daniel Jeliński wrote:
>> Aleksei Efimov has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Measure time the caller spent waiting. Simplify timeoutLeft computation
>
> src/jdk.naming.dns/share/classes/com/s
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 09:38:35 GMT, Mark Sheppard wrote:
>> Aleksei Efimov has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Measure time the caller spent waiting. Simplify timeoutLeft computation
>
> src/jdk.naming.dns/share/classes/com/sun
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 22:29:23 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
>> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
>> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
>> clock. The existing `Timeout` test ha
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 22:29:23 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
>> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
>> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
>> clock. The existing `Timeout` test ha
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 22:29:23 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
>> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
>> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
>> clock. The existing `Timeout` test ha
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 17:15:43 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> I have been wondering why the timeout was measured in this way. My
>> explanation was that the original author of the API (duke? ;-) ) wanted to
>> measure "actual timeout" (time actually spent waiting for a packet) as
>> opposed to per
> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
> clock. The existing `Timeout` test has also been updated to use the nano
> clock to measure obser
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 15:03:46 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> Sounds like a right thing to do: measuring time in the loop should give us
>> better estimation on time DNS client spends waiting on the response after
>> submiting a query (that's how environment property value is defined in
>> [javadoc
> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
> clock. The existing `Timeout` test has also been updated to use the nano
> clock to measure obser
> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
> clock. The existing `Timeout` test has also been updated to use the nano
> clock to measure obser
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 11:42:25 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
>> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
>> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
>> clock. The existing `Timeout` test ha
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 14:42:41 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> src/jdk.naming.dns/share/classes/com/sun/jndi/dns/DnsClient.java line 477:
>>
>>> 475: long elapsedMillis =
>>> TimeUnit.NANOSECONDS.toMillis(end - start);
>>> 476: // Setting the Math.clamp min to
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 13:58:51 GMT, Daniel Jeliński wrote:
>> Aleksei Efimov has updated the pull request incrementally with two
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - guard against possible integer value overflows
>> - make startTime a local variable
>
> src/jdk.naming.dns/share
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 11:42:25 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
>> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
>> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
>> clock. The existing `Timeout` test ha
On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 16:58:20 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> Aleksei Efimov has updated the pull request incrementally with two
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - guard against possible integer value overflows
>> - make startTime a local variable
>
> test/jdk/com/sun/jndi/dns/C
On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 13:12:23 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> Aleksei Efimov has updated the pull request incrementally with two
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - guard against possible integer value overflows
>> - make startTime a local variable
>
> src/jdk.naming.dns/share/cl
> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
> clock. The existing `Timeout` test has also been updated to use the nano
> clock to measure obser
On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 16:28:36 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
> clock. The existing `Timeout` test has al
On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 16:28:36 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
> This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations
> in the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
> - The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
> clock. The existing `Timeout` test has al
This PR proposes the following changes to address wrong timeout computations in
the `com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient`:
- The `DnsClient` has been updated to use a monotonic high-resolution (nano)
clock. The existing `Timeout` test has also been updated to use the nano clock
to measure observed timeou
54 matches
Mail list logo
