Socket broken due to socket resource leak???

[uncutstone]

It is really a triky problem. My OS is windows 98, ruby version is ruby
1.8.2 (2004-12-25) [i386-mswin32].

Following code is used to illustrate the problem I encountered. Before
you execute it, please ensure to be offline, so it can be run very fast
.. Please notice the line in tcpclient.rb "145.times do", it is the
key issue.

Let me explain it.

Tcpserver.rb is a local tcp server simply sends a hello message
whenever a client is connected. Tcpclient.rb first makes a connect to
the local tcp server( this connection will be read later), then tries
many times to connect to a bad ip addresses which indeed can never be
connected. So every try will raise a exception " Unknown Error -
connect(2)". This exception is simply ignored and the client
continues trying.

The wiered thing is , after certain number of tries, the established
connection between the tcp client and the local tcp server is broken.
So the line "goodConn.gets" also raises a exception . Even more,
what exception "goodConn.gets" raised is realted to the number of
tries to connect to the bad ip.

a. if times is less than 140 , it acts normally, nothing wrong, a hello
message is received from the local tcp server. I got this:

Exception raised: Unknown Error - connect(2)
Hello from local tcp server

b. If 140< times <145, I got this :

Exception raised: Unknown Error - connect(2)
tcpclient.rb:19:in `gets': Bad file descriptor (Errno::EBADF)
from tcpclient.rb:19:in `testsocket'
from tcpclient.rb:24

c. if times > 145, I got this:
Exception raised: Unknown Error - connect(2)
tcpclient.rb:19:in `gets': Invalid argument (Errno::EINVAL)
from tcpclient.rb:19:in `testsocket'
from tcpclient.rb:24

General speaking, it seems a resource leak happens every time a
"Unknown Error-connect(2)" exception raised when the tcpclient
failed to connnect to a bad ip address. So after a substantial number
of tries, the leak accumulates and the socket is crushed. Is it a bug
of socket library??

Code is listed below, if you are insterested, please try it, run the
ftpserver.rb first.
1. tcpserver.rb:

require 'socket'
server = TCPServer.new('localhost',21)
while(session = server.accept)
session.print "Hello from local tcp server"
session.close
end


2. tcpclient.rb:

require 'socket'
def testsocket
goodAddr = "localhost"
goodConn = TCPSocket.new(goodAddr,21)

badAddr = "137.144.70.12" #no connection could established on this
address
145.times do
badconn = nil
begin
badconn = TCPSocket.new(badAddr,21)
rescue Exception => aException
puts "Exception raised: #{aException.to_s}"
ensure
badconn.close if @badconn and not @badconn.closed?
end
end

s = goodConn.gets
puts s
goodConn.close
end

testsocket

 

[Robert Klemme]

It is really a triky problem. My OS is windows 98, ruby version is ruby
1.8.2 (2004-12-25) [i386-mswin32].

Following code is used to illustrate the problem I encountered. Before
you execute it, please ensure to be offline, so it can be run very fast
. Please notice the line in tcpclient.rb "145.times do", it is the
key issue.

Let me explain it.

Tcpserver.rb is a local tcp server simply sends a hello message
whenever a client is connected. Tcpclient.rb first makes a connect to
the local tcp server( this connection will be read later), then tries
many times to connect to a bad ip addresses which indeed can never be
connected. So every try will raise a exception " Unknown Error -
connect(2)". This exception is simply ignored and the client
continues trying.

The wiered thing is , after certain number of tries, the established
connection between the tcp client and the local tcp server is broken.
So the line "goodConn.gets" also raises a exception . Even more,
what exception "goodConn.gets" raised is realted to the number of
tries to connect to the bad ip.

This comes as no surprise as the server closes the connection after it
has sent his hello message. Since you don't immediately retrieve the
message it may well be that the connection close overrides the buffered
data and you never see it.

Kind regards

robert

 

[uncutstone]

This comes as no surprise as the server closes the connection after it
has sent his hello message. Since you don't immediately retrieve the
message it may well be that the connection close overrides the buffered
data and you never see it.

It is not so simple. Please try anotherclient.rb
require 'socket'

def testsocket
goodAddr = "localhost"
goodConn = TCPSocket.new(goodAddr,21)

sleep 30

s = goodConn.gets
puts s
goodConn.close
end

testsocket
I got:
Hello from local tcp server

After 30 seconds of sleep, tcp server is sure has closed the session,
client can still get the result .

You can also add a line "session.gets" in tcpserver.rb before
“session.print ‘Hello from local tcp server’”
and a goodConn.puts("hello") before "goodConn.gets", so the tcpserver
will wait for tcpclient before it sends hello message.
But what I have described remains , socket broken due to substantial
times of failed connection attempt.

 

[uncutstone]

I rewrite the code, socket broken still happens:

tcpserver.rb:
require 'socket'

server = TCPServer.new('localhost',21)
while(session = server.accept)
puts "Client Request: #{session.gets}"
session.print "Hello from local tcp server"
session.close
end

tcpclient.rb:

require 'socket'

def testsocket
goodAddr = "localhost"
goodConn = TCPSocket.new(goodAddr,21)

badAddr = "137.144.70.12" #no connection could established on this
address
160.times do
badconn = nil
begin
badconn = TCPSocket.new(badAddr,21)
rescue Exception => aException
puts "Exception raised: #{aException.to_s}"
ensure
badconn.close if @badconn and not @badconn.closed?
end
end

goodConn.puts("hello")
s = goodConn.gets
puts s
goodConn.close
end

testsocket

 

[uncutstone]

Be sure to be offline when you try the code above. Being offline will
make it run fast, otherwise it will take long time to run.

 

[uncutstone]

Maybe this post is too long to read. Let me make it simple.

General speaking, I think it is likely a bug of ruby's socket library.
It seems that a resource leak happens every time TCPSocket.new failed.

Do you agree it is a bug? Or I missunderstood something. Any opinion is
highly appreciated.