More urllib timeout issues.

I thought I had all the timeout problems with urllib worked around,
but no.

socket.setdefau lttimeout is useful, but not always effective.
I'm setting that to 15 seconds.
If the host end won't open the connection within 15 seconds,
urllib times out. But if the host end opens the connection,
then never sends anything, urllib waits for many minutes before
timing out. Any idea how to deal with this? And don't just
say "use urllib2" unless you KNOW it works better there and
can explain why. I finally have M2Crypto and urllib playing
well together, and don't want to mess with that.

For some wierd reason, several UK academic sites have this
behavior, including "soton.ac.u k". If you try to open that
in a browser, the browser just sits there, and eventually,
after several minutes, displays "The site is taking too
long to respond".

What's the current status in this area? Some patches to sockets
were proposed a while back. There's a long history of trouble
in this area, and some fixes, but nothing that just works.
The sockets module has two timeout settings (socket.setdefa ulttimeout and
sock.settimeout , the M2Crypto module has two (sock.set_socke t_read_timeout and
sock.set_socket _write_timeout) , and none of them play well together
or with the urllib/urllib2/httplib level and the blocking/non blocking
socket distinction.

What we really should have is something like this:

Sockets should have
set_socket_conn ect_timeout
set_socket_read _timeout
set_socket_writ e_timeout

which set an upper limit on how long a socket can go with a request for
a connect, read or write pending but without progress on the connection.
This needs to be independent of select poll timeouts, and these timeouts
should work on blocking sockets.

The existing socket function

settimeout

should set all of the above, and

socket.setdefau lttimeout

should set the default value for settimeout to be used on new sockets.

SSL and M2Crypto, which wrap socket functionality,
should understand all the above functions.

HTTPlib, urllib, and urllib2 objects should understand

settimeout

Making the connect/read/write timeout distinction at that level
probably isn't worth the trouble.

Then we'd have a reasonable network timeout system.
We have about half of the above now, but it's not consistent.

Comments?

John Nagle wrote:

>Then we'd have a reasonable network timeout system.
We have about half of the above now, but it's not consistent.

Comments?

The only comments I'll make for now are

1) There is work afoot to build timeout arguments into network libraries
for 2.6, and I know Facundo Batista has been involved, you might want to
Google or email Facundo about that.

2) The main reason why socket.setdefau lttimeout is unsuitable for many
purposes is its thread-unsafe property, so all threads must use the same
default timeout or have it randomly change according to the whim of hte
last thread to alter it.

3) This is important and sensible work and if properly followed through
will likely lead to serious quality improvements in the network libraries.

regards
Steve

I took a look at Facundo Batista's work in the tracker, and he
currently seems to be trying to work out a good way to test the
existing SSL module. It has to connect to something to be tested,

1) There is work afoot to build timeout arguments into network libraries
for 2.6, and I know Facundo Batista has been involved, you might want to
Google or email Facundo about that.

Steve Holden wrote:

>>1) There is work afoot to build timeout arguments into network libraries
for 2.6, and I know Facundo Batista has been involved, you might want to
Google or email Facundo about that.

Right now (in svn trunk) httplib, ftplib, telnetlib, etc, has a timeout
argument.

If you use it, the socket timeout will be set (through s.settimeout()) .
What behaviour has the socket after setting it the timeout, is beyond of
these changes, though.

BTW, I still need to make the final step here, that is adding a timeout
argument to urllib2.urlopen ().

Regards,