Kommentare zu: JabberHTTPBind 1.1.1 http://blog.jwchat.org/2008/06/25/jabberhttpbind-111/ coding and stuff Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:49:25 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5 Von: Steve http://blog.jwchat.org/2008/06/25/jabberhttpbind-111/#comment-224583 Steve Wed, 15 Sep 2010 09:28:35 +0000 http://zeank.in-berlin.de/2008/06/25/jabberhttpbind-111/#comment-224583 Sachin, there's no timeout defined between JHB and the XMPP server. Sorry! Also I forgot to tag the latest release. My fault. I guess the tag should be applied at revision r65, but I'm not sure about this. If you want the lastest code just check out trunk, there's nothing bad about it. Sachin, there’s no timeout defined between JHB and the XMPP server. Sorry!

Also I forgot to tag the latest release. My fault. I guess the tag should be applied at revision r65, but I’m not sure about this. If you want the lastest code just check out trunk, there’s nothing bad about it.

]]> Von: Sachin Khandelwal http://blog.jwchat.org/2008/06/25/jabberhttpbind-111/#comment-224578 Sachin Khandelwal Sat, 11 Sep 2010 05:58:18 +0000 http://zeank.in-berlin.de/2008/06/25/jabberhttpbind-111/#comment-224578 The connection between the JHB and XMPP Server timedout in some time if its idle. Is there any way or configuration setting to disable the timeout property. There is no svn tag for version JabberHTTPBind-1.1.1. Can you plz create tag for this version. So that we can checkout the latest released src. The connection between the JHB and XMPP Server timedout in some time if its idle. Is there any way or configuration setting to disable the timeout property.

There is no svn tag for version JabberHTTPBind-1.1.1. Can you plz create tag for this version. So that we can checkout the latest released src.

]]> Von: Steve http://blog.jwchat.org/2008/06/25/jabberhttpbind-111/#comment-224213 Steve Tue, 22 Sep 2009 06:54:38 +0000 http://zeank.in-berlin.de/2008/06/25/jabberhttpbind-111/#comment-224213 Maty, besides I don't know <em>ConcurrentHashMap</em> I'm pretty sure there isn't :) Maty, besides I don’t know ConcurrentHashMap I’m pretty sure there isn’t :)

]]> Von: Maty http://blog.jwchat.org/2008/06/25/jabberhttpbind-111/#comment-224144 Maty Sat, 01 Aug 2009 19:11:52 +0000 http://zeank.in-berlin.de/2008/06/25/jabberhttpbind-111/#comment-224144 Speaking of concurrency and clocking threads, is there a special reason why not to use <i>ConcurrentHashMap</i> instead of <i>Hashtable</i> for storing the sessions? Speaking of concurrency and clocking threads, is there a special reason why not to use ConcurrentHashMap instead of Hashtable for storing the sessions?

]]> Von: Steve http://blog.jwchat.org/2008/06/25/jabberhttpbind-111/#comment-223788 Steve Wed, 14 Jan 2009 19:11:44 +0000 http://zeank.in-berlin.de/2008/06/25/jabberhttpbind-111/#comment-223788 Madhuri, I'm very sorry, I still haven't fixed this issue. Unfortunately I'm still very busy with other things ("all work and no play ..."). I'll do my best to fix this ASAP. Cheers, -Steve Madhuri, I’m very sorry, I still haven’t fixed this issue. Unfortunately I’m still very busy with other things (“all work and no play …”). I’ll do my best to fix this ASAP.
Cheers, -Steve

]]> Von: Madhuri Patwardhan http://blog.jwchat.org/2008/06/25/jabberhttpbind-111/#comment-223777 Madhuri Patwardhan Fri, 09 Jan 2009 04:11:57 +0000 http://zeank.in-berlin.de/2008/06/25/jabberhttpbind-111/#comment-223777 Hi Steve, This was the last correspondence we had about a bug in JabberHttpBind, in March 2008. ****************************************************************** # Steve Kommentar by Steve | 2008/04/23 at 10:44:23 Madhuri, you’re totally right, this is a bug. Access to session objects needs to be synchronized at this point. Guess I’ll have to rework this… (explains some strange behavior I’ve been noticing) ******************************************************************* Any update on session object synchronization? I would appreciate if you could let me know status of this one. Thanks, Madhuri Hi Steve,

This was the last correspondence we had about a bug in JabberHttpBind, in March 2008.

******************************************************************
#
Steve Kommentar by Steve | 2008/04/23 at 10:44:23

Madhuri, you’re totally right, this is a bug. Access to session objects needs to be synchronized at this point. Guess I’ll have to rework this… (explains some strange behavior I’ve been noticing)

*******************************************************************

Any update on session object synchronization? I would appreciate if you could let me know status of this one.

Thanks,
Madhuri

]]>