Print

---

ciao fabrizio, thanks indeed that makes sense, I was just saying that then there is no intrinsic randomness, and you (the client ) has to rely on the “else” to try all the clients.

Indeed I can be chasing ghosts, but I read

        while (urlArray.Size() > 0) {

          unsigned int seed = XrdOucCRC::CRC32((const unsigned char*)unfo.File.c_str(), unfo.File.length());

            // Get an url from the available set
            if ((thisUrl = urlArray.GetARandomUrl(seed))) {
                std::cout <<" TOMMASO GOT "<<thisUrl->Host<<std::endl;

                if (fConnModule->CheckHostDomain(thisUrl->Host)) {
                    nogoodurl = FALSE;

                    Info(XrdClientDebug::kHIDEBUG, "Open", "Trying to connect to " <<
                         thisUrl->Host << ":" << thisUrl->Port << ". Connect try " <<
                         connectTry+1);
                    locallogid = fConnModule->Connect(*thisUrl, this);
                    // To find out if we have tried the whole URLs set
                    std::cout <<" TOMMASO GOT2 "<<locallogid<<std::endl;
                    urlstried++;
>>>>>                    break;
                } else {
                    // Invalid domain: drop the url and move to next, if any
                    urlArray.EraseUrl(thisUrl);
                    continue;
                }
            }
        }

so we “break” in any case, even if fConnModule->Connect( failed.

I tentatitevely changed this to 

                    if (locallogid != -1) break;

and now it tries again with the other server if the first connection fails


probably what i say does not make sense, but I cannot see otherwise how you spot a failed connection, without checking the result of “connect” …

tom

On 24 Apr 2014, at 11:29, Fabrizio Furano <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Hi Matevz,
> 
> I think that I can comment on this historical item.
> Yes, the reproduceability was explicitely requested a couple of
> aeons ago. It made sense to me too, easing the debugging.
> 
> For the other issue with attempt #7 I don't know...
> 
> Fabrizio
> 
> 
> On 24/04/14 11:20, Tommaso Boccali wrote:
>> please note another thing:
>> 
>>           unsigned int seed = XrdOucCRC::CRC32((const unsigned
>> char*)unfo.File.c_str(), unfo.File.length());
>> 
>> so per file always the same random number is spit out, is this wanted?
>> clearly to have this working one needs the “else” to be operational
>> above, otherwise there is neither randomness, not retry ….
> 
> ########################################################################
> Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list
> 
> To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-L list, click the following link:
> https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-L&A=1

########################################################################
Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list

To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-L&A=1