I created a stand-alone Datasnap TCP/IP server using the Wizard. I selected sample methods (echostring and reversestring). I saved the server and ran it. Then I created a client application, and using the file-new-other, added a ClientModule to that client project, along with the ClientClasses unit. On the main form. I added a button. On the button's onclick event handler, I added the following code:
procedure TForm1.Button1Click(Sender: TObject);
begin
if ClientModule1.SQLConnection1.Connected then
begin
Button1.Text := 'Open';
ClientModule1.SQLConnection1.Close;
end
else
begin
Button1.Text := 'Close';
// ClientModule1.SQLConnection1.Open;
ClientModule1.ServerMethods1Client.ReverseString('myteststring');
end;
end;
The purpose here is to simulate a situation where the client is logging into and logging out of the server regularly rather than keeping a connection. This is especially important on apps deployed to mobile.
You can see I commented out the Connection.Open, because the first call to the ServerMethods1client opens the connection. The generated code is shown here:
function TClientModule1.GetServerMethods1Client: TServerMethods1Client;
begin
if FServerMethods1Client = nil then
begin
SQLConnection1.Open;
FServerMethods1Client := TServerMethods1Client.Create(SQLConnection1.DBXConnection, FInstanceOwner);
end;
Result := FServerMethods1Client;
end;
Now the problem arises. On first click to the button, the connection is opened, and the method is called. On the second click to the button, the connection is closed.
On the 3rd click, an exception is raised "Operation Failed. Connection was Closed" is raised from with the TDBXCommand code.
As a workaround, I tried this:
procedure TForm1.Button1Click(Sender: TObject);
begin
if ClientModule1.SQLConnection1.Connected then
begin
Button1.Text := 'Open';
ClientModule1.SQLConnection1.Close;
ClientModule1.ServerMethods1Client := nil;
end
else
begin
Button1.Text := 'Close';
// ClientModule1.SQLConnection1.Open;
ClientModule1.ServerMethods1Client.ReverseString('myteststring');
end;
end;
This does sort-of solve the problem, since the ClientModule1's FServerMethods1Client instance is reset so the create code runs again like it did on the first run.
The only other problem now, is (I am using Eurekalog) it creates a memory leak.
What am I doing wrong? What's the right way to connected/disconnect from a Datasnap server repeatedly without restarting the app?
The reason for the first error is that the code that binds the client side proxy (which allows server methods to be called) is tied to the local SQL connection. Note the call to create the proxy class:
FServerMethods1Client := TServerMethods1Client.Create(SQLConnection1.DBXConnection, ...)
The underlying DBExpress connection is passed by reference, and the proxy class uses that connection to call the server. You closed and re-opened the connection, but the underlying DBExpress connection that ServerMethodsClient1 was using has been destroyed. Thus, you receive the "Connection was closed" exception. The connection that ServerMethodsClient1 was using has been closed. You have to recreate ServerMethodsClient1 as you did in your second example.
I can't answer your second question, as I believe it is ARC specific. For a VCL DataSnap app, I would call ServerMethodsClient1.Free rather than setting it to nil. Based on my very, very limited understanding of Delphi's ARC implementation (which is all from the newsgroups), I believe you should call ServerMethodsClient1.DisposeOf, since the class descends from TComponent
But I'm not sure about that. I'm sure someone will jump on here that understands ARC and the proper solution to destroy the object rather than having a memory leak.
In my Android FMX implementation, I only call servermethods to get stuff done. (ie I don't use Datasnap data components). There's too much uncontrolled data transmission overhead to the Datasnap architecture to contemplate anything else realistically on a mobile device... To get around it (and not have memory leaks), I now create local instances of the TServermethods1Client as and when I need them and free them in context:
function TClientModule1.PostTheLog: Boolean;
var
Server: TServerMethods1Client;
begin
Server := TServerMethods1Client.Create(ClientModule1.SQLConnection1.DBXConnection);
try
UserID := Server.GetUserID;
...
finally
Server.Free;
end;
end;
Now the ClientModule1.SQLConnection1 can be connected and disconnected at will (preferably connected just before any call to a servermethod, and disconnected thereafter) and no further issues arise.
Which then begs the question: In which ideal world would the publicly accessible ServerMethods1Client actually be useful?
Related
I'm using TIdHTTP in my class to handle web APIs (TWebAPI). Since it might happen that this class is used in a TIdHTTPServer.OnCommandGet event handler, I need to make sure that TWebAPIis thread safe.
Do I need to wrap a PUT/GET/POST inside a TMultiReadExclusiveWriteSynchronizer?
EDIT: Code-Sample
TWebAPI
TWebAPI=class(TObject)
FSocket:TidHTTP;
end;
procedure TWebAPI.Send;
Var
Response:TSTringStream;
begin
FSocket.Get(fURL,Response);
end;
Main Program
TMain=class(TForm)
Server:TidHTTPServer;
WebAPI:TWebAPI;
end;
procedure TMain.ServerCommandGet(....)
begin
WebAPI.Send;
end;
So my WebAPI would be used in different threads on each command the server gets. SHould I use the CriticalSection in TMain, or implement it in TWebAPI like this?
TWebAPI=class(TObject)
FSocket:TidHTTP;
FLock:TCriticalSection;
end;
procedure TWebAPI.Send;
Var
Response:TSTringStream;
begin
FLock.Aquire;
try
FSocket.Get(fURL,Response);
finally
FLock.Release;
end;
end;
A single TIdHTTP could be protected by a TCriticalSection or TMonitor. There is no R/W involved, so don't use TMultiReadExclusiveWriteSynchronizer - just a mutex/lock. But if you use a single TIdHTTP you will need a mutex/lock, so all HTTP calls will be serialized, which may be not a good idea on a multi-threaded server.
I would maintain one connection per thread, or write a connection pool. Perhaps just a given TIdHTTP each time may not be too bad. At least it will be safe and there will be room for improvement later on. Reopening a TCP/HTTP connection is quick in practice.
I'm trying to make a Delphi application to work with AlwaysOn solution. I found on Google that I have to use MultiSubnetFailover=True in the connection string.
Application is compiled in Delphi XE3 and uses TADOConnection.
If I use Provider=SQLOLEDB in the connection string, application starts but it looks like MultiSubnetFailover=True has no effect.
If I use Provider=SQLNCLI11 (I found on Google that OLEDB doesn't support AlwaysOn solution and I have to use SQL Native client) I get invalid attribute when trying to open the connection.
The connection string is:
Provider=SQLOLEDB.1;Password="password here";Persist Security Info=True;User ID=sa;Initial Catalog="DB here";Data Source="SQL Instance here";MultiSubnetFailover=True
Do I have to upgrade to a newer version on Delphi to use this failover solution or is something that I'm missing in the connection string?
I am currently using XE2 with SQL Server AlwaysOn. If you read the documentation you will see that AlwaysOn resilience events will cause your database connection to fail and you need to initiate a new one.
If a SqlClient application is connected to an AlwaysOn database that
fails over, the original connection is broken and the application must
open a new connection to continue work after the failover.
I've dealt with this via the simple expedient of overriding the TAdoQuery component with my own version which retries the connection after getting a connection failure. This may not be the proper way to do this but it certainly works. What it does is override the methods invoked for opening (if the query returns a result set) or executes the SQL (otherwise) and if there is a failure due to connection loss error tries again (but only once). I have heavily tested this against AlwaysOn switch overs and it works reliably for our configuration. It will also react to any other connection loss events and hence deals with some other causes of queries failing. If you are using a component other than TAdoQuery you would need to create similar overrides for that component.
It is possible this can be dealt with in other ways but I stopped looking for alternatives once I found something that worked. You may want to tidy up the uses statement as it clearly includes some stuff that isn't needed. (Just looking at this code makes me want to go away and refactor the code duplication as well)
unit sptADOQuery;
interface
uses
Windows, Messages, SysUtils, Classes, Db, ADODB;
type
TsptADOQuery = class(TADOQuery)
protected
procedure SetActive(Value: Boolean); override;
public
function ExecSQL: Integer; // static override
published
end;
procedure Register;
implementation
uses ComObj;
procedure Register;
begin
RegisterComponents('dbGo', [TsptADOQuery]);
end;
procedure TsptADOQuery.SetActive(Value: Boolean);
begin
try
inherited SetActive(Value);
except
on e: EOleException do
begin
if (EOleException(e).ErrorCode = HRESULT($80004005)) then
begin
if Assigned(Connection) then
begin
Connection.Close;
Connection.Open;
end;
inherited SetActive(Value); // try again
end
else raise;
end
else raise;
end;
end;
function TsptADOQuery.ExecSQL: Integer;
begin
try
Result := inherited ExecSQL;
except
on e: EOleException do
begin
if (EOleException(e).ErrorCode = HRESULT($80004005)) then
begin
if Assigned(Connection) then
begin
Connection.Close;
Connection.Open;
end;
Result := inherited ExecSQL; // try again
end
else raise;
end
else raise;
end;
end;
end.
I'm working to an application with a login form at the start-up.
Until user is writing the login data, I would like to connect discreetly to the SQL server.
The problem is that, when I have a slow connection or a wrong path to the server, the application is looking for the server or trying to connect and in this time the application is not responding.
For connection I use this procedure:
//-- SQL connect --//
procedure TSql.Connect;
var
DriverId: String;
i: Byte;
begin
try
Screen.Cursor:=crAppStart;
//connection DriverName
DriverId:=Server[FServerType].DriverId;
FConnection.DriverName:=DriverId;
//connection Params
FConnection.Params.Clear;
FConnection.Params.Add('DriverID='+DriverId); //mandatory
if FConnString.Count>0 then
for i := 0 to FConnString.Count-1 do FConnection.Params.Add(FConnString.Strings[i]);
try
FConnection.Open;
FQuery.Connection:=FConnection;
except
on E : Exception do ShowError(_('Connection could not be established!'),E);
end;
finally
Screen.Cursor:=crdefault;
end;
end;
Please help me with some suggestion about how this can be done. I've read about threads and Application.ProcessMessages but I did not succeed to make it work smoothly.
Create a new thread, and do everything you need on it, that will not hang the main form and the user will not see anything you can see simillar functionality here
I have three questions:
is it possible to destroy IdTCPServer by to many connection?
I tried to test my application and when I have several connections - it works very good (even several days) but when sometimes number of connection increases application gives acess violation. I wrote application similates 50 clients sending data constantly (with only sleep(200)). And in this situation IdTCPServer gives exceptions?
My application reseives information from clients by onExecute event and modyfies databases table using
TidNotify and TIdSync classes. I believe it protects crosses connections threads?
Sending information to clients is doing by TTimer (it is only now, I'll change it to other thread).
Have I use in this situation special protection or something like that is enough:
type
PClient = ^TClient;
TClient = record
Activity_time:TDateTime;
AContext: TIdContext;
end;
...
list := server.Contexts.LockList;
try
for i := 0 to list.Count - 1 do
with TIdContext(list[i]) do
begin
if SecondsBetween(now(), PClient(data)^.activity_time) > 6 then
begin
Connection.IOHandler.Close;
Continue;
end;
try
Connection.IOHandler.writeln('E:');
Except
Connection.IOHandler.Close;
end;
end;
finally
server.Contexts.UnlockList;
end;
2.Is a simple way to refuse connection when server is to busy (I think my database isn't complicated (100 rows, only one row is modyfied by one connection) but maybe here is a way to keep stability of server?
3.I know that this question was repeating many times but I didn't find satisfying answer: how to protect application to avoid message exception: "Connection closed gracefully" and "Connection reset by peer"?
Thank You for all advices
is it possible to destroy IdTCPServer by to many connection?
You are asking the wrong question, because you are not actually destroying TIdTCPServer itself, you are simply closing idle connections from an outside thread. That kind of logic can be (and should be) handled inside of the OnExecute event instead, where it is safest to access the connection, eg:
type
PClient = ^TClient;
TClient = record
Activity_time: TDateTime;
Heartbeat_time: TDateTime;
AContext: TIdContext;
end;
procedure TForm1.serverConnect(AContext: TIdContext);
var
Client: PClient;
begin
New(Client);
Client^.Activity_time := Now();
Client^.Heartbeat_time := Client^.Activity_time;
AContext.Data := TObject(Client);
end;
procedure TForm1.serverDisconnect(AContext: TIdContext);
var
Client: PClient;
begin
Client := PClient(AContext.Data);
AContext.Data := nil;
if Client <> nil then Dispose(Client);
end;
procedure TForm1.serverExecute(AContext: TIdContext);
var
Client: PClient;
dtNow: TDateTime;
begin
Client := PClient(AContext.Data);
dtNow := Now();
if SecondsBetween(dtNow, Client^.Activity_time) > 6 then
begin
AContext.Connection.Disconnect;
Exit;
end;
if SecondsBetween(dtNow, Client^.Heartbeat_time) > 2 then
begin
AContext.Connection.IOHandler.WriteLn('E:');
Client^.Heartbeat_time := dtNow;
end;
if AContext.Connection.IOHandler.InputBufferIsEmpty then
begin
if not AContext.Connection.IOHandler.CheckForDataOnSource(100) then
Exit;
end;
// process incoming data as needed ...
Client^.Activity_time := Now();
end;
Is a simple way to refuse connection when server is to busy (I think my database isn't complicated (100 rows, only one row is modyfied by one connection) but maybe here is a way to keep stability of server?
The current architecture does not allow for refusing connections from being accepted. You can let the server accept connections normally and then close accepted connections when needed. You can do that in the OnConnect event, or you can set the server's MaxConnection property to a low non-zero number to allow the server to auto-disconnect new connections for you without wasting resources creating new TIdContext objects and threads for them.
Another option is to call the server's StopListening() method when the server is busy, so that new connections cannot reach the server anymore, and then call the server's StartListening() method when you are ready to accept new clients again. Existing clients who are already connected should not be affected, though I have not actually tried that myself yet.
I know that this question was repeating many times but I didn't find satisfying answer: how to protect application to avoid message exception: "Connection closed gracefully" and "Connection reset by peer"?
You should not avoid them. Let them happen, they are normal errors. If they are happening inside of the server's events, just let the server handle them normally for you. That is how TIdTCServer is designed to be used. If they are happening outside of the server's events, such as in your timer, then just wrap the socket operation(s) in a try/except block and move on.
I tried to employ Indy 10.5.5 (shipped with Delphi 2010) for:
connecting to telnet server
performing username/password authentication (gaining access to the command shell)
executing a command with returning resulting data back to application
and had no success, additionally i'm completely lost in spaghetti logic of Indy's internals and now have no idea why it didnt work or how i supposed to send strings to the server and grab the results. Need some sample code to study.
Formal form of the question: Where can i get 3-rd party contributed demo covering TIdTelnet component? (indyproject.org demos webpage do not have one)
The main problem with Telnet is that it DOES NOT utilize a command/response model like most other Internet protocols do. Either party can send data at any time, and each direction of data is independant from the other direction. This is reflected in TIdTelnet by the fact that it runs an internal reading thread to receive data. Because of this, you cannot simply connect, send a command, and wait for a response in a single block of code like you can with other Indy components. You have to write the command, then wait for the OnDataAvailable event to fire, and then parse the data to determine what it actually is (and be prepared to handle situations where partial data may be received, since that is just how TCP/IP works).
If you are connecting to a server that actually implements a command/response model, then you are better off using TIdTCPClient directly instead of TIdTelnet (and then implement any Telnet sequence decoding manually if the server really is using Telnet, which is rare nowadays but not impossible). For Indy 11, we might refactor TIdTelnet's logic to support a non-threaded version, but that is undecided yet.
done with indy.
no comments.. just som old code :-)
telnet don't like the send string kommand.. use sendch.
telnetdude.Host := 1.1.1.1;
try
telnetdude.connect;
except
on E: Exception do begin
E.CleanupInstance;
end; {except}
if telnetdude.Connected then begin
for i := 1 to length(StringToSend) do telnetdude.sendch(StringToSend[i]);
telnetdude.sendch(#13);
end;
end; {while}
end; {if}
if telnetdude.Connected then telnetdude.Disconnect;
end;
I hope this helps anyone looking for answers to a similar question.
Firstly, It would seem the typical command/response model (as mentioned above, does indeed NOT apply).
So I just got it working for some very simple application (rebooting my router).
Specific additions to above code from Johnny Lanewood (and perhaps some clarification)
a) You have to send #13 to confirm the command
b) I got "hangs" on every command I sent / response I requested UNTIL I enabled ThreadedEvent. (this was my big issue)
c) the OnDataAvailable event tells you when new data is available from the Telnet Server - however there are no guarantees as to what this data is - i.e. it's pretty what you get in the command line / what ever is appended to the previous responses. But is is NOT a specific response line to your command - it's whatever the telnet server returns (could be welcome info, ASCII drawings etc etc.)
Given (c) above, one would rather check the OnDataAvailable event and parse the data (knowing what you'd expect). When the output stops (i.e. you need build a mechanism for this), you can parse the data and determine whether the server is ready for something new from the client. For the purpose of my code below, I set a read timemout and I just used Sleep(2000) - ignorantly expecting no errors and that the server would be ready after the sleep for the next command.
My biggest stumbling block was ThreadedEvent := True (see above in b)
Thus, my working solution (for specific application, and possibly horrible to some).
lIDTelnet := TIdTelnet.Create(nil);
try
lIdTelnet.ReadTimeout := 30000;
lIDTelnet.OnDataAvailable := TDummy.Response;
lIDTelnet.OnStatus := TDummy.Status;
lIdTelnet.ThreadedEvent := True;
try
lIDTelnet.Connect('192.168.0.1', 23);
if not lIDTelnet.Connected then
Raise Exception.Create('192.168.0.1 TELNET Connection Failed');
Sleep(2000);
lIdtelnet.SendString(cst_user + #13);
Sleep(2000);
lIdtelnet.SendString(cst_pass + #13);
Sleep(2000);
lIdtelnet.SendString(cst_reboot + #13);
Sleep(2000);
if lIDTelnet.Connected then
lIDTelnet.Disconnect;
except
//Do some handling
end;
finally
FreeAndNil(lIdTelnet);
end;
and then
class procedure TDummy.Response(Sender: TIdTelnet; const Buffer: TIdBytes);
begin
Write(TDummy.ByteToString(Buffer));
end;
class function TDummy.ByteToString(
const aBytes: TIdBytes): String;
var
i : integer;
begin
result := '';
for i := 0 to Length(aBytes) -1 do
begin
result := result + Char(aBytes[i]);
end;
end;