Sockets, threads, and killing servers

[Kenneth Jonsson]

It might be a good idea to bind the control socket to the loopback address
so the server can not be shutdown from a remote machine.

/ K

"Kenneth Jonsson" <kennethjonsson at bredband.net> wrote in message
news:l1o%7.7694$461.12145 at news2.bredband.com...
> You could use a second socket that is listening for shutdown messages and
> do a select on both sockets to avoid the delay you get with the
> select-with-a-timeout method.
>
> The second socket could be used for all sorts of server control messages
> (pause, resume, restart, e.t.c)
>
> / K
>
> "Joshua Muskovitz" <joshm at taconic.net> wrote in message
> news:3c3cc04f_4 at corp.newsgroups.com...
> > > 1) Subclass the ThreadingTCPServer class so that instead of calling
> > >    socket.accept() and blocking until a connection comes in, it will
> > >    call select.select() with a timeout; at the end of the timeout, it
> > >    will check a "Quit now?" flag and if the flag is set, will close
the
> > >    connection and exit. If the quit flag is not set, go back into the
> > >    select.select() for another N seconds.
> >
> > This is very similar to the solution we developed at my last job.  It
> worked
> > well, but it means that there is a non-deterministic delay between
setting
> > the "self destruct" flag, and the server actually stopping.  So long as
> this
> > doesn't bother you, it should work well.
> >
> > For us, it was a concern in that the service was supposed to be highly
> > reliable, so it needed to be restarted quickly in case it crashed.  But
> > there was a small race condition between the shutdown of the old process
> and
> > the startup of the new, especially because of contention for owning the
> > server's TCP port.
> >
> > -- j
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> > http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> > -----==  Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
>
>