similar to: Event loop responsiveness + client

Hi everyone, If you subclass EventMachine::Connection and call it outside an EventMachine::run event loop, EventMachine crashes! Example: class Put < EventMachine::Connection include EventMachine::Deferrable HOST="localhost" PORT=8080 def self.request(data) EventMachine.connect(HOST, PORT, self) {|c| c.instance_eval { @data = data } } end #

Hello, I have been looking at the Ruby/EventMachine. First let me say it look very good. Reactor model with no threads makes for fast reliable server, and I have read about marvelous Twisted framework for Python and am glad to see something similar for Ruby. I am writing network app with Ruby threads now and it very slow, and I try new Ruby 1.9 with native threads that make it much slower.

Hello all, I''ve been learning Ruby and playing with a chat server I built using GServer. After into an issue I found with GServer, that no one else seemed to notice (actually, similar to this question, GServer is hard to kill nicely, especially when you want to.), I found references to EventMachine, and rebuilt my server using it. I much prefer EventMachine''s model. The

Hi all Is the EventMachine website (www.rubyeventmachine.com) down? I can''t access it from South Africa, and have tried using tor as well with no luck. I''m kinda new to EventMachine, so I first have a lot of examples to work through and reading to do before I start pestering the mailing list with questions. Thanks to everyone who partook in creating the library, so far

Hi All, I''m currently looking into doing a bit of evented network programming in ruby and i''m currently looking into packet, eventmachine and rev. The problem is that I need to be able to fork and start a new reactor within the forked child (it also should open a socket and write status information back to the main process). I have not been able to do this with EventMachine.

Hi EM Gurus, I''m hoping someone can shed some light on the following... I''m using a 3rd party (legacy) server that can accept up to 8 simultaneous connections on one port. I''ve been able to make multiple connections to this server from within one call to EventMachine::run {...}. Specificaly, I can access each connection separately using: em_thread = Thread.new do

I''ve added experiments/core-model-2 to SVN. I think this is pretty clean and satisfactory. Jeff, please have a look and see if you like the placement of timeouts (which are currently unimplemented). Any event now has the possibility of a timeout. To get an application-level timeout, you''d just post an event with a timeout to a nil target. When the timeout expires, the errback

Hi, On windows, get_peername works both with connections obtained via start_server, and connections obtained via connect. On linux, get_peername seems to only work with connections obtained via start_server. (I''m using svn HEAD.) I''m wondering which is the intended behavior? (I realize get_peername is less useful for connections obtained via connect, since one should already

Hi, list Now I am coding for one non-blocking httpclient based on event-machine, and it seems the client will hang for 50 seconds if the destination is unreachable. My questions are 1. How can I short the timeout? I had tried conn.set_comm_inactivity_timeout(5), but it didn''t work 2. How can I add TimeoutHandler to the connection? Thanks! /Jack -- Jack Tang Software

I''ve actually found a way to make EventMachine listen to events from a serial port, but only by using the pure Ruby version, using Guilliame Pierronnet''s Ruby/SerialPort library. It turned out to be simpler than I thought it would be: require ''serialport'' $eventmachine_library = :pure_ruby require ''eventmachine'' module EventMachine class

I am using eventmachine 0.8.1 on windows XP and am having very odd problems. This snippet of code gives the error that follows it. class EchoServer def receive_data data puts data send_data ">>>you sent: #{data}" if data =~ /quit/i puts "quitting" close_connection EventMachine::stop_event_loop end end end

When I call EM::stop from within a Deferrable callback, I''m getting the following: terminate called after throwing an instance of ''std::runtime_error'' what(): already initialized Abort trap Is there any way to trace this a little further? -- Duane Johnson

Guys, Just for fun, I tried to see (I know, a silly way to test it) how much overhead we have calling the C functions of the extensions. the benchmark script and the results: http://pastie.caboo.se/128646 The naive C extension: http://pastie.caboo.se/128647 I compared 1.8.6 (VC6 and mingw builds) against a fresh checkout of ruby trunk. What I understand from that is 1.9 is slower than 1.8

Ok, here is the class, I want to Unit Test, its part of a large app and is based on EventMachine library. I want to mock the class TickServer ( i.e not stub it) . Since in actual scenario, you can''t do this on this class: @server = TickServer.new # will toss an exception at your face you must initialize the server like this: EventMachine.run {

Short question: is there way to tell EM to actually send data after send_data call? I''m building a file transferring app. I send Mashal.dump''ed metadata first, and then - the file contents (chunked). I found a silly bug: receive_data() gets marshalled metadata and the first chunk of the file in a single variable. Like that: c1.send_data("meta")

I''m using the current release branch from the repository (version_0) on freebsd 6.1 with ruby 1.8.4. This is the error that is generated when running the code below at the bottom of the message, plus a gdb bt. Sorry no debugging symbols built into ruby but maybe the bt will help anyways. terminate called after throwing an instance of ''std::runtime_error'' what():

Just thought I''d let you know that your http parser worked great for creating an http protocol handler for Eventmachine. It wouldn''t take that much effort to use Eventmachine for Mongrel, might be worth a shot just to see how it does. A few things would need to be restructered, like HttpRequest where you read the rest of the body, and calling the handler. But it

Hi Folks, We are glad to announce shiny new release of BackgrounDRb, which will soon become 1.0. A quick summary of changes: - BackgrounDRb is no londer DRb, its based on event driven network programming library packet ( http://www.packet.googlecode.com ) . - Since we moved to packet, many nasty thread issues, result hash corruption issues are totally gone. Lots of work has went in making

In "Understanding the Linux Kernel" 3rd edition, section 4.7 "Softirqs and Tasklets" it states: "Activation and execution [of defferable functions] are bound together: a deferrable function that has been activated by a given CPU must be executed on the same CPU. There is no self-evident reason suggesting that this rule is beneficial for system performance. Binding the

I heard about a new mongrel plugin or version that''s single threaded and uses non-blocking IO with events. It''s called something like "swifty fly". Anyone have a link for it? Thanks.