|
Thanks Michael
The solution was to use
int fd = _open_osfhandle((intptr_t)myHandle, _O_TEXT);
FILE * f = _fdopen(fd, "ac");
Now I can have c# client apps writting to the same log file as existing c++ libraries without modifying the existing c++ logging code 
System.IO.Path.IsPathRooted() does not behave as I would expect
|
|
|
|
|
This[^] article is very helpful in this regard.
|
|
|
|
|
is there any zip format using checksum MD5, not CRC32?
or, any idea to compare between MD5 and CRC32????
plz help!
|
|
|
|
|
MD5 is a hash algorithm, which means it does not contain enough info to turn back in to the original data. CRC32 is, I believe, the same. There is therefore no way I can see that you could compare the two. I also don't know of any zip format that uses MD5.
Christian Graus - C++ MVP
'Why don't we jump on a fad that hasn't already been widely discredited ?' - Dilbert
|
|
|
|
|
yeah.
thanks for reply. i just trying to find another way...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alright, school is up back to the IOCP server
Everything works near to fine now, thanks to the good help i got from this site.
Anyways, there is one small problem/bug/design flaw left. I currently found a way around it but i dont like having ugly code with a way uglier solution.
Ok again im still using the IOCP with UDP.
Anyways, The problem is that i get trash in my completion ports. for example, i send something which goes fine by the way. After that i do a WSARecvFrom. Then i retrieve a IOCP notification pointing to the right extended overlapped. Now, the data inside is somethimes the right data i expected to recieve with the right size like 600 bytes, but somethimes it returns a size of 1 and no data unless i give it some time. So what do i do, i just continue and recieve a next notificication when recieving 1. this next notification contains the right data + size, so my first question, why did i get notified about my recv request before he comepletely recieved the data. a second problem, whenever i had the right data, it notifies me for like 2 extra times about it before nocking it off.
Anyone knows a NICE way to prevent this because its really ugly.
Thanks already!
|
|
|
|
|
Can you show the code you are using to look at the send completion packets - from the
GetQueuedCompletionStatus() call on?
If it truly returned indicating one byte received then you'd have to keep that one byte and
repost the recv for the remaining bytes. This doesn't make sense for UDP though, unless your
buffer sizes are messed up when you call WSARecvFrom().
|
|
|
|
|
while (pThis->m_bKeepAlive){ <br />
BOOL bIORet = GetQueuedCompletionStatus (
pThis->m_hIOCompiltionPort,<br />
&dwIoSize,<br />
reinterpret_cast<LPDWORD>(pThis),<br />
&ptrOverlapped, INFINITE);<br />
ptrOverlappedPlus = reinterpret_cast<_OVERLAPPEDVirtualSession*>(ptrOverlapped);<br />
ptrSession = ptrOverlappedPlus->pClientContext;<br />
<br />
if (!bIORet){<br />
__REPORT("Winsock error code: %i\n", GetLastError());<br />
Gameye::Library::Thread::CMPThread::Sleep(0);<br />
}<br />
else{<br />
CAbstractServerClass* ptrGameClass = (*pThis->m_ptrGameManager)[ptrSession->getNDServer()->GameID];<br />
if (ptrGameClass == NULL){<br />
__REPORT("Game is unknown, probably removed");<br />
}<br />
else{<br />
objToolset.Session = ptrSession;<br />
switch(ptrSession->getTask()){<br />
case Begin:
pThis->m_objAddGameToolset.Session = ptrSession;<br />
ptrGameClass->RequestServerInfo(ptrSession->getNDServer(), &pThis->m_objAddGameToolset);<br />
break;<br />
case RequestSend:
dwIoSize = 0;<br />
iTemp = 0;<br />
ptrSession->setStatus(AfterSend); <br />
if (WSASendTo(ptrSession->getSocket(), <br />
ptrSession->getWSABuffer(),<br />
1,<br />
&dwIoSize,<br />
0,reinterpret_cast<sockaddr*>(ptrSession->getAddress()),<br />
sizeof(sockaddr_in),<br />
ptrSession->getOverlapped(), NULL) == -1)<br />
{<br />
int iErrorCode = WSAGetLastError();<br />
if (iErrorCode == ERROR_IO_PENDING){<br />
break;<br />
}<br />
else{<br />
__REPORT("Recieving failed because: %i", WSAGetLastError());<br />
pThis->ReleaseSession(ptrSession);<br />
}<br />
}<br />
case AfterSend:
if (dwIoSize <= 1)<br />
break;<br />
<br />
ptrSession->incSendBytes(dwIoSize);<br />
if (ptrGameClass->RetrieveServerInfo(ptrSession->getNDServer(), &objToolset) < 0){<br />
__REPORT("%s->RetrieveServerInfo() failed", ptrGameClass->Gamename());<br />
pThis->ReleaseSession(ptrSession);<br />
}<br />
break;<br />
case RequestRecieve:
dwIoSize = 0;<br />
iTemp = 0;<br />
ptrSession->setStatus(AfterRecieve);<br />
if (WSARecvFrom(ptrSession->getSocket(), <br />
ptrSession->getWSABuffer(),<br />
1,<br />
&dwIoSize,<br />
&iTemp,reinterpret_cast<sockaddr*>(ptrSession->getAddress()),<br />
&iSockAddrSize,<br />
ptrSession->getOverlapped(), NULL) == -1)<br />
{<br />
int iErrorCode = WSAGetLastError();<br />
if (iErrorCode == ERROR_IO_PENDING){ <br />
break;<br />
}<br />
else{<br />
__REPORT("Recieving failed because: %i", WSAGetLastError());<br />
pThis->ReleaseSession(ptrSession); <br />
}<br />
}<br />
case AfterRecieve:
if (dwIoSize == 1)<br />
break;<br />
ptrSession->incRecvBytes(dwIoSize);<br />
if ((iTemp = ptrGameClass->UnpackServerInfo(ptrSession->getNDServer(), &objToolset)) == 0){
pThis->FinishGame(ptrSession->getNDServer());<br />
}<br />
else if (iTemp > 0){
break;<br />
}<br />
else if (iTemp < 0){<br />
__REPORT("%s->UnpackServerInfo() failed", ptrGameClass->Gamename());<br />
}<br />
pThis->ReleaseSession(ptrSession);<br />
break;<br />
default:<br />
break;
}<br />
}<br />
}
|
|
|
|
|
Reusing the overlapped struct is no problem. You just can't use it in more than one pending
(uncompleted) overlapped operation at a time.
I suggest carefully checking error conditions here. The documented results for
GetQueuedCompletionStatus() should be handled something like this:
BOOL bIORet = GetQueuedCompletionStatus (
pThis->m_hIOCompiltionPort,
&dwIoSize,
reinterpret_cast(pThis),
&ptrOverlapped, INFINITE);
(pseudocode)
if (bIORet)
{
if (was overlapped socket operation)
{
if (dwIoSize == 0)
{
}
else
{
if (AfterRecieve)
{
if (dwIoSize < numberofbytesrequested)
receive (numberofbytesrequested - dwIoSize) more bytes
else
}
}
}
}
else
{
if (ptrOverlapped)
{
}
else
{
}
}
Can you post the code that calls WSARecvFrom, including the parameters passed and how you are
checking for errors? Please use the "pre" tags instead of the "code" tags as well
|
|
|
|
|
sure:
int Recieve(char* buffer, size_t buflen){
if (m_iLastRecieved > 0){
m_wsaBuf.len = static_cast<ULONG>(buflen) - m_iTotalRecieved;
m_wsaBuf.buf = buffer + m_iTotalRecieved;
m_wsaBuf.buf[0] = 0;
}
else{
buffer[0] = 0;
m_wsaBuf.len = static_cast<ULONG>(buflen);
m_wsaBuf.buf = buffer;
}
static int sockaddr_len = sizeof(sockaddr_in);
DWORD temp(0);
setStatus(RequestRecieve);
return (PostQueuedCompletionStatus(m_hIOCP, 1, reinterpret_cast<ULONG_PTR>(this), getOverlapped()) == FALSE);
}
Thats where i make my request to post. You might wonder if it aint dangerous for the buffer to overflow or something but most of the checking goes outside this function and i can assure that there is no overflow since i'm only testing with 1 game which is secured in any way i know off.
The requested bytes is unknown, it can variate depending on the used game from like 100 to a few packets of 1500 kb however mostly its just something like 1 packet with 600 bytes (i know because my previous version of the application worked perfectly, only it wasnt using IOCP just the lame one thread per server way ) anyways, with this topic still being open and all, there is one other ugly thing i cant find a good solution for. Is there any way to close a overlapped operation because i need to reuse the overlapped structures, and that means that if there is a timeout check function somewhere in my application just running once in a while over all the overlapped operations looking if they arent timed out because it could hapen that one of the 1000 servers wont give a response for some or other reason and else the overlapped structure would be in use all the time waiting for nothing to come.
|
|
|
|
|
Polity4h wrote: to a few packets of 1500 kb
1500KB? That's too big for a UDP datagram 
All I can think of is check all your send and receive counts on both ends in the debugger.
With UDP you should be receiving complete datagrams the size that were sent (providing they
arrive successfully - UDP doesn't guarantee that).
Why do you use UDP? Have you allowed for messages that don't make it?
Polity4h wrote: Is there any way to close a overlapped operation because i need to reuse the overlapped structures, and that means that if there is a timeout check function somewhere in my application just running once in a while over all the overlapped operations looking if they arent timed out...
The only way I know is to close the socket. Any pending queued overlapped operations on the
socket will be released by GetQueuedCompletionStatus(). If you want to check periodically then
you could use a timer, the dwMilliseconds parameter to GetQueuedCompletionStatus(), or some other
method. Close the socket after the appropriate period of inactivity.
|
|
|
|
|
Cancel Overlapped Socket Op Update:
From a Larry Osterman (Microsoft engineer) blog, apparently you can use CancelIo(), casting your
socket handle to a "HANDLE".
Give it a try - worst that can happen is it fails
Mark
|
|
|
|
|
CancelIo doesnt work, the thing is that it needs to be ran from the same thread where Overlapped operations were posted. I could however close the socket and open it again, but what are the drawbacks of this? this means that i need to close and open like 20 sockets per second in the future. looks really hard to me, but i cant really figure out what might happen when i do this.
|
|
|
|
|
Polity4h wrote: CancelIo doesnt work, the thing is that it needs to be ran from the same thread where Overlapped operations were posted.
Yeah I thought about that since you are posting overlapped ops from your worker thread(s)
20 sockets per second? How long is the time you are willing to wait before the remote node is
considered inactive??
|
|
|
|
|
alright, i might have thought a bid to far in the future were i got myself a mainframe  << -_- whatever, anyways, lets say 2 sockets needs to be created per second. wont this kill my system after doing this a long time ( my app needs to run constantly for, count them up a few years ) << thats the perfect vision ofcourse.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure what you are trying to do. Why do you need to keep creating sockets but never
destroy them? Surely you'll run out of sockets if you do that
|
|
|
|
|
...I could however close the socket and open it again, but what are the drawbacks of this? this means that i need to close and open like 20 sockets per second in the future...
hehe, anyways your saying that your server wont suffer to hard when creating AND DESTROYING lets say 2 sockets per second?
|
|
|
|
|
No. As long as that's really what your app needs to do.
Think about how many TCP sockets a busy web (HTTP) server must open and close per second.
20 per second is nothing
Mark
|
|
|
|
|
ok now i know enough. thanks for everything mark, you've helped me alot
|
|
|
|
|
*EDIT* Having a pool of sockets could improve performance - that way only ConnectEx/DisconnectEx
needs to be called on a socket instead of recreating/destoying the entire socket every time.
Mark
|
|
|
|
|
src=msdn:The Windows Sockets ConnectEx function establishes a connection to a specified socket, and optionally sends data (called connect data) once the connection is established. The ConnectEx function is only supported on connection-oriented sockets.
remember, i'm forced to use connectionless protocols thanks anyway
|
|
|
|
|
Gotcha man I was just extending my comment about TCP sockets on an HTTP server
|
|
|
|
|
Hi!
In a dialog I have a number of customized check boxes, displaying a red check when leftclicked and a blue check when rightclicked. The red and blue determines if an associated variable shall be associated to the left or right axis in a chart. This works fine except that if the dialog is covered by a window and then redisplayed, the checkboxes that have been clicked disapper.
I have tried all the obvious calls, Invalidate(), RedrawWindow(), UpdateWindow(), Show(), OnPaint() etc. to redisplay the dialog, but the checkboxes wont reappear.
Can anybody give me a hint on how should I do this?
Thanks!
maladuk
|
|
|
|
|
If you are doing much of the drawing of the controls yourself, you need to make sure that areas that have been marked as invalidated are also marked as validated (see functions like ValidateRect(...)) when drawing is done, otherwise Windows may not think that you have drawn an invalidated area yet.
Usually, not having a validated area causes excessive paint messages, but I have seen strange things happen...
Incorrect handling of the WM_ERASEBKGND message can also cause similar things to happen.
Peace!
-=- James Please rate this message - let me know if I helped or not!<HR>If you think it costs a lot to do it right, just wait until you find out how much it costs to do it wrong!
Avoid driving a vehicle taller than you and remember that Professional Driver on Closed Course does not mean your Dumb Ass on a Public Road!
See DeleteFXPFiles
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
