On 18 Nov, 12:52 pm, peter.westl...@pobox.com wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014, at 01:09, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
On 12:42 am, peter.westl...@pobox.com wrote:
>Okay, how about http://bugs.python.org/issue9090, "Issue #9090 :
Error
>code 10035 calling socket.recv() on a socket with a timeout
>(WSAEWOULDBLOCK - A non-blocking socket operation could not be
>completed
>immediately)"?
Twisted also doesn't use sockets with timeouts - although the way
socket
timeouts are implemented in Python, I could perhaps imagine some
timeout
configuration leaking into Twisted's sockets due to some other code
running in the same process.
Can you check to see if your AMP connection's underlying socket has a
timeout set? It *shouldn't*. Twisted doesn't set one. If some other
code is causing a timeout to be set, I guess this could be the
culprit.
socket.gettimeout() returns 0.0, which just means non-blocking, right?
According to the Python documentation, yes. I was expecting to see
`None` instead, though.
Given that strace shows a recvfrom failing with an EAGAIN, followed by
a recvfrom reading the AMP reply after the missing one, I think this
must
be a kernel or hypervisor bug. In hindsight it could never have been
1038591
even if Twisted had used that bit of code, because that reads the data
in and
then loses it. So strace would have shown it being read.
I'll get some help from my local TCP experts, and let you know if I
find
anything
out. In the meantime, thank you all for your patience and help.
Good luck! Please let us know if you discover anything else.
Jean-Paul
_______________________________________________
Twisted-Python mailing list
Twisted-Python@twistedmatrix.com
http://twistedmatrix.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/twisted-python
