> >> You need to have a Windows _server_ version to support
> >> 1000 simultaneous connections.
> > I wonder what the limitations on workstation versions are?
> > A few hundreds?
> There is no limitation. The difference is that
> the server versions will
> hadle more efficient this kind of huge I
Hello David,
> for the "ptrTemp". (1) What is the best number , i.e. a number
> that gaurentee it is not to o small, while not occupying too much
> memory?
8 KB is a good size if you have a fast network.
> have ptrTemp as a fixed size buffer determined at design time, and have
> it locally i
Hello David,
you receive first 50, and then OnDataAvailble will be fired again
immedialty where you receive next 50. So there is no problem.
---
Rgds, Wilfried [TeamICS]
http://www.overbyte.be/eng/overbyte/teamics.html
http://www.mestdagh.biz
Wednesday, November 2, 2005, 02:20, Kei wrote:
> if
Hello Jack,
There is no limitation. The difference is that the server versions will
hadle more efficient this kind of huge IO.
The only limitation is the amount of non-paged memory pool (the part
that not be swapped to disk). On Intel86 systems this pool can grow to
maximum 1/8 of phisical RAM. A
I wonder what the limitations on workstation versions are?
A few hundreds?
> You need to have a Windows _server_ version to support
> 1000 simultaneous connections.
--
To unsubscribe or change your settings for TWSocket mailing list
please goto http://www.elists.org/mailman/listinfo/twsocket
V
if I specify a buffer that is actually not big enough to hold a packet,
then what will happen?
e.g.
var
myBuffer: array[0..50] of char;
receivedSize: longint;
receivedSize := MywSock.receive(myBuffer);
if the socket wants to give me 100 bytes but I only have 50.. what will
happen?
Da
I got it. so this is what I'll do:
A> txt 10240
B> (malloc ptrAltogether 10240 bytes; Let sizeRemain = 10240;sizeDone=0)
sendtxt
A> "010010101010101..."
B> (First packet is ready:
var ptrTemp: array[0..MAX_PACK] of char;
Zero(ptrTemp);
if(sizeThisPack = Receive(ptrTemp) > 0)
Hello Arnaldo,
Yes that is another option, but the 1 second delay he had has nothing to
do with it. TCP_NODELAY disable the Nagle algoritm. If my RAM serve me
well Nagle will wait at maximum 100 milliseconds for transmit to see if
something else is coming.
And it will do this delay only if there
Hello David,
> So I ignored the zero und -1 returned by the Receive(), and it worked :)
Great ! I'm glad it works for you :)
> But the "TempSize" in my code was never changed. it was set as to a
> constant value en the constructor.
Ok no problem then. But if your buffer has a constant size, t
You can force socket faster small packet sending by using TWsocket --->
ComponentOptions > wsoTcpNoDelay ---> true
See Microsoft socket help files about possible collateral effects
(search setsockopt TCP_NODELAY)
Larini wrote:
>Why this event must be used?
>I'm testing my application
Thanks for taking the time to read my dirty code.. I apologize if that
is too hard to read for you ... I'm not a good programmer yet... sorry!
So I ignored the zero und -1 returned by the Receive(), and it worked :)
But the "TempSize" in my code was never changed. it was set as to a
constant va
I would add that PutStringInSendBuffer and PutDataInSendBuffer are very
useful when you have small data chunks that you want to send in a bigger
one. That is make as possible as sure that the packets have maximum size.
for a:=0 to 80 do
Socket.PutStringInSendBuffer(MyString);
Socket.Send(nil,
Larini wrote:
> Why this event must be used?
It's not a must, I'm talking about larger amount of data.
It saves memory because the internal send buffer grows dynamically.
For instance if your string is 1 GB also 1 GB of RAM would be
allocated internally.
It also keeps your application responsive,
Hello Larini,
Time for transfer a packet from one machine to another is depending on
the load of the network.
OnDataSent is prefer to use if you send big amounts of data. You can
however push whole data into TWSocket and it will send it in chuncks for
itself, but if you for example send 100 MB da
Why this event must be used?
I'm testing my application and some times a send of a small packet take 1
second, other times the same packet take about no time. There is a way to
force send anyway?
This
mail was sent by Webmail 2.5
--
To unsubscribe
Larini wrote:
> Hi, I want to know if there are a difference between the two codes bellow:
>
> MyString = 100 bytes
>
> 1.
> For a:=0 to 80 do
> socket.SendStr(MyString);
>
>
> 2.
> For a:=0 to 80 do
> aux:=aux+MyStr;
> socket.SendStr(aux);
>
>
> The first one, sends about 8000 bytes using 8
Hello Larini,
for winsock it will end up probably the same, but in (2) you are 80
times re-allocating memory and probably copying bytes several times.
if you really dont can create the send buffer at once you can do this:
for a := 0 to 80 do
Socket.PutStringInSendBuffer(MyString);
Socket.Sen
Hi, I want to know if there are a difference between the two codes bellow:
MyString = 100 bytes
1.
For a:=0 to 80 do
socket.SendStr(MyString);
2.
For a:=0 to 80 do
aux:=aux+MyStr;
socket.SendStr(aux);
The first one, sends about 8000 bytes using 80 sendstr commands
The second send about 8000
Hello,
Sorry, you need a typecast:
Client := TClient(WSocketServer.Client[n]);
---
Rgds, Wilfried [TeamICS]
http://www.overbyte.be/eng/overbyte/teamics.html
http://www.mestdagh.biz
Tuesday, November 1, 2005, 11:09, ICSNewbie2005 wrote:
> Hi Mr. Wilfried M.,
> Yes below is code I am talking ab
Hello David,
> GetMem(TempBuffer, TempSize); // first packet
> bytesReceived := Self.Receive(TempBuffer, ReceiveSize);
In the part where you allocate mem for first packet ReceiveSize should
be set to TempSize.
Wy do you allocate anyway. Wy not put your buffer as an array on the
stack
I'm sorry to tell youi your OnDataAvailable event handler is wayy too
complex and difficult to read.
First, you should use better naming conventions. See the naming used in all
ICS demos.
For example, I would have named as follow:
TSession => TSessionWSocket or TSessionClientWSocket
ReceiveStr =>
Hi Mr. Wilfried M.,
Yes below is code I am talking about =), When i went to compile though it
say Incompatible types.
Client which is of Type (TClient) and the assignment
to wSocketServer.Client[] which is of Type (TWSocketClient).
Lol i did not know sending data to 2 different connection make so h
Hello David,
I suggest to first see if the sender or the receiver fails. you can easy
do that if you hang SocketSpy (user made) between them.
> Line 4117: Received -1 bytes, Remaining 3123 bytes
> Line 4118: WARNING! Transfer went wrong! Error 0
No nothing went nececary wrong. Ignore 0 and -1, j
I'm Sorry! I thought the code was too big to attach.. anyway here it is
My component "TSession" is a descendent from the TWCliSocket.
WaitStatus is a public property, that states what "state" the class is
currently at.
David
procedure TSession.MyDataAvailable(Sender: TOb
> I asked about a method to recognize the "splitted packets" and to join
> them upon arrival of the last one. So far my protocol works fine, and
This is really the most common task when dealing with TCP transmission. You
have such "packet reassembly" in almost all ICS components. TWSocket itself
Hi, this is David.
I asked about a method to recognize the "splitted packets" and to join
them upon arrival of the last one. So far my protocol works fine, and
all the data is assembled in an orderly manner. For large texts or
binary data, the clients knows how to handle it as follows:
The "Red
26 matches
Mail list logo
