Go Back   FlashFXP Forums > > > >

Bug Reports If you discover any bugs that we are not aware of, please post it here so it may be corrected.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 11-01-2003, 03:29 PM   #1
darkone
Disabled
FlashFXP Registered User
ioFTPD Administrator
 
darkone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,230
Default RaidenFTPD <=> ioFTPD

Lately this has been one of the hottest topic. So here's brief explanation of the problem:

ioFTPD uses graceful shutdown, which is described in msdn article:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de..._closure_2.asp

use quote to get the url.. vbulletin doesn't seem to like urls this long

It means that after send operation, ioFTPD will wait until it receives FD_CLOSE from client (which is sent by client by issuing shutdown(socket, SD_SEND); closesocket() does not issue shutdown!). If FD_CLOSE, is not received, it (io) will wait until socket times out (hardcoded to 600seconds), or socket layer notifies it for inproper pipe closure.

Now why isn't ioftpd using the ordinary solution, and leaving close notification managment to kernel/winsock: it all comes down to one thing, scalability. This implementation allows ioftpd to have total control over socket buffers. And trust me, it's needed when there are several hundreds, or even thousands of connnections. (current build of ioftpd can handle up to 1024 connections... and it can do it without problems... that's what scalability is all about )

Here is a short example, how graceful shutdown should be done, when lingering is disabled:

1) send(socket, ...);
2) recv(socket, ...);
1) shutdown(socket, SD_SEND); // end of send operation
1) recv(socket, ...); // waits for 0
2) recv(socket, ...); // returns 0
2) shutdown(socket, SD_BOTH); // end of receive operation
2) closesocket(socket);
1) ... recv returns 0
1) shutdown(socket, SD_RECV);
1) closesocket(socket);

easy, uhh?
darkone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2003, 03:49 PM   #2
MaistroX
Senior Member
FlashFXP Registered User
ioFTPD Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 221
Question

Oki, now we ALL understand , but why does it seem to work from ioFTPD to most other deamons of FTPD´s and NOT to/from RaidenFTPD ?


As for me I dont care, but think alot of other folks wonder !
MaistroX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2003, 04:38 PM   #3
darkone
Disabled
FlashFXP Registered User
ioFTPD Administrator
 
darkone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,230
Default

I have this super-secret raiden detector to kill the competition no really.. we're both competing from different kinds of users: io aims for maximal performance, under extremely heavy loads. (using io, with < 100connections, is waste of my time ) It features everything you can read from msdn; command queus, job queues, timer queues, disk access queues, socket queues.... almost everything is done using the optimal solution under NT-platform (only os buffering for sockets & disk access haven't been disabled... but I'm working on solutions to disable them too ;p I want to get max user count on io server to ~10k)
darkone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2003, 11:55 PM   #4
Mouton
Posse Member
Ultimate Scripter
ioFTPD Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,956
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by MaistroX
Oki, now we ALL understand ;) , but why does it seem to work from ioFTPD to most other deamons of FTPD´s and NOT to/from RaidenFTPD ?
Raiden doesn't send the signal to tell the other side that the send is done: shutdown(socket, SD_SEND)

So the other side waits undefinitively for that signal, and finally timeout waiting for it. This happens with ioFTPD and ProFTPD, both of which expect to receive that signal. Other ftpd are lazy, and don't expect that signal. They just assume it.
Mouton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2003, 06:04 AM   #5
thewarden
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 194
Default

I understand the aim for total performance to be as best as possible...as I strive for that performance as well.

BUT - as there always is one

When you compare a main stream solution for such tasks, the flip
side to this is not where "many" of your end users will be now,
nor anytime in the near future.

Not when the average home based site is on simple home based
solutions that are mainly based on COST. They would not use
such power. Even now at 1024 connections, that is impressive,
but overall, how many sites would even come close to that useage?


If you want ~10K - and I see your point.


BUT - another one here

Most home based and just above that (this is where the "MANY")
come into play - have to deal with others running RAIDEN.

Lets face facts here, unless the other guy changes, and we know
that will not take place...as each and every topic on this is some
how deleted on that support forum.


Maybe a poll would tell you want the end user wants, and then
you can see if it is worth the effort to either code 2 versions or
put a fix in...if this is even possible.

And then cost the versions accordingly

- power version ~10K
- home based version able to use raiden type ftpds

At least then you can cover all areas and trial it for a few months
to see if the "R" versions pick up based on such platform choice.

TW
thewarden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2003, 06:25 AM   #6
Zer0Racer
Senior Member
ioFTPD Scripter
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 703
Default

There is nothing wrong in aiming for 10k connections and super-high performance. It doesn't perform any slower with 100 connections or with 10 connections.

And I really don't think ioFTPD has to work other way than RFC compliance just because other ftpds don't follow the standard(s). ioFTPD works just like it's supposed to, some others don't.
Zer0Racer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2003, 06:57 AM   #7
Unique
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 231
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by thewarden
I understand the aim for total performance to be as best as possible...as I strive for that performance as well.
blahblih MOOOOooooOOo...
TW

With such reasoning you might as well stick to raiden.
Its good for home users who like no stability nor performance and its so great!

Let d1 do what hes best at, making a great ftpd.
I frankly dont give a **** if some lame ass n00b ftpd like raiden doesnt work with ioftpd.
Raiden isnt even in the same league anymore, its like comparing a trabant with a ferrari. Logically you cant race with them both on the same race track without one breaking down trying to catch up desperately.
Unique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2003, 07:14 AM   #8
Zer0Racer
Senior Member
ioFTPD Scripter
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 703
Default

That's one way of putting it.
Zer0Racer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2003, 09:14 AM   #9
thewarden
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 194
Default

Unique -

With thinking like that - it is nothing more that what I expect
from PRO and ANTI people who have closed minds.

Exactly what is the problem with asking DARKONE for other
possible choices. Asking is causing no harm and he has the
final say on any question asked - NOT YOU

So QUOTE " blahblih MoooooooOOoo " all you want KIDDIE as
that is how your reply comes across - A spolied brat!

And as far as racing - your logic in this is not really a good one,
as I'm sure you never heard of restrictor racing? Where you
have a choice of LIMITING your power so you can reap the
benifits from all - the end result is you have a choice running
with total all out power, or reduce your power to run with the
lesser group.
thewarden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2003, 09:21 AM   #10
thewarden
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 194
Default

Zer0Racer -

I stated that - nothing wrong at all with that and I strive for it as
well, as in that message.

All I stated was that most people would not use that power
and that is the truth...

I did not say IO should run like raiden, please quote that - I
stated maybe there can be a choice...what is wrong with that?

If people don't ask with at least some reasoning with their
question - there is no need to ask in the first place.

And you as well know that what I said is the truth, most buyers
of IO or RAIDEN will never come close to having a main stream
solutions running out their homes.

It is just unfortunate that the 2 top dogs don't get along...and
that is stated in the first message - is a hot topic.

WE KNOW RAIDEN WILL NOT CHANGE!

Just maybe, by asking here - JUST A HUGE MAYBE, but unless
asked...we will never know - that JUST MAYBE...Darkone could
have a CHOICE on it....but that is his choice.

So I asked...


And that is one way of putting it = SIMPLY ASKED!

No where did I DEMAND or SUGGEST IO change - I ASKED FOR
A POSSIBLE CHOICE - a choice some people may want to make
for themselves IF that choice was there.
thewarden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2003, 09:26 AM   #11
Rudenstam
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1
Default

yeah.. lets cap io's power so it can race with raiden and the others..
Rudenstam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2003, 12:06 PM   #12
Unique
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 231
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by thewarden
Unique -
With thinking like that - it is nothing more that what I expect
from PRO and ANTI people who have closed minds.
... all you want KIDDIE as
that is how your reply comes across - A spolied brat!...
Many thanks for calling me a spoiled kid with a closed mind.
Talking about childish behaviour..

"sure you never heard of restrictor racing?" frankly i dont no. Happy now?

"WE KNOW RAIDEN WILL NOT CHANGE!"
Maybe its time to dump raiden then and search a program that actually works.
Oh yea nice CAPS problem you have too.. or were you trying to impress us with your screaming.... either way its retarted.

Maybe d1 can "fix" this problem, question is if thats a good idea.
RFC Rules aint there for nothing...
What if in the future another thing aint working with raiden, io has to "fix" it again? Its gonne be an endless tunnel like this, especially with all the bugs raiden has.

Greetings,
UNi
Unique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2003, 12:51 PM   #13
megauser
Junior Member
ioFTPD Foundation User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 17
Default this thread

Has gotten way off topic, Lets try to focus on ioFTPD and not R****n please....

D1 isnt going to be making any product that trys to look like the other guys.. its not what he is doing this for, he has a GREAT platform and idea to make a killer ftpd.

The Development around ioFTPD is astounding btw. I for one use R****** for almost 4 years, til this one became stable enough to use in production and I isntantly switched, after Paying the fee of course , my site is about 3 TB is size too.. so I didn't make this move just to see if it worked... I wanted a solution that was long term!

$10 is CHEAP for a product of this caliber and development, its worth is 10x more.

So.... sorry to be a burden on everyone here, but I just needed to get that off my chest. Darkone is doing a killer job here putting this out, he is doing it based on standards (which in my book speaks alot) to the integrety of the guy!

Megauser
megauser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2003, 04:08 AM   #14
thewarden
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 194
Default

Ok, stand corrected - I am not one to give others excuses when
I'm wrong...that much I give too myself.

BUT - I will not now or in the future "NOT" ask for choices, be them
correct ones, or ones people may not like.

And I reply as I am replied too - you get what you give, and that
is best understood.

TW


By the way - I am 1001% for IO to continue on as it is and even
get far better than the others. that I want to make clear - else,
why would I or even others make good or dumb suggestions if
not wanting to see IO continue on.
thewarden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2003, 04:50 AM   #15
thewarden
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 194
Default Re: this thread

megauser -

Has gotten way off topic, Lets try to focus on ioFTPD and not R****n please....

- agreed, I am a bad boy for brining in the other ftpd

The Development around ioFTPD is astounding btw.

- agreed again, as I paid for (after leaving GLFTP) to go to MS the
ftpd's of G6, SERV-U, RAIDEN, IO - all of them...as one got better
and one made more "CHOICES" for me to use so I could give the
best to those that support my site...and I will be upfront here, if
another one comes along better than IO - I will buy and test that
one as well. If better, bye bye IO just like bye bye raiden...just
like the many other 100's who have did that themselves by
jumping to IO from what they USE to use.

I am not a so called "FAN BOY" of any one program and I will
never be, BUT I will support what I use...and I will continue to
leave messages of possible choices or suggestions, be them
good or dumb ones, as I paid for the right to do so by
SUPPORTING the program by paying the fee asked for it.

In the end, only the coder can say YES or NO, or if possible picked
up by 3rd party scripters on any idea left...as we have seen time
and time again on any ftpd that is robust enough to allow
scripters the freedom to code for it.



$10 is CHEAP

- agreed again ... the cost of IO and what it offers is about the
best deal going now...ex: the so called choice of BW control that
was the long awaited CHOICE of useage - but there are many
like myself who paid for IO while not using it until certain
CHOICES came into the ftpd and as I hoped and they did or are
in the topics to do list. 10.00 is a hell of a bargan even to pay
out inadvance while not using the ftpd...but the main item I LIKED
HERE OVER ALL OTHERS = Choices are OK to ask for and
CENSORSHIP is not a word USED HERE.

Some choices should not be asked, but hey...unless asked you
will never know...but at least you see the topic being discussed
by the people - and not RULED OVER

That alone is worth the 10.00 !!!


TW
thewarden is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
ioftpd, recvsocket, shutdown, shutdownsocket, socket

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:40 AM.

Parts of this site powered by vBulletin Mods & Addons from DragonByte Technologies Ltd. (Details)