What happen when two process having the same port configure - operating-system

Suppose we have two process having the same port, but one at a time one will be using it and other one will be in passive mode and once the active process goes down, the passive will start reading from the port.
now since in linux everything is a file descriptor, i wanted to know is there any way where passive process can immediately start reading from the port.
Currently i am closing the port in active process and then again open it in the passive once it becomes active.
Thanks in advance.

No, only one process can read from a port at a time. Even on linux, when a process uses the port, it locks it. It is linux architecture that everything is a file(with exception of network devices). But these device files(or ports) are special files or device files. You cannot manipulate them as normal files.

Related

Is it possible to deploy without downtime without disconnecting TCP sockets connected?

There is a long connected TCP socket. Up to two clients can connect to a server. In other words, the load is not high. However, once a TCP connection is made, the socket will not be disconnected unless there is an accident, such as a server power down or network failure. Is it possible to reuse an existing TCP socket when restarting the process? I think TCP load balancer like AWS NLB cannot be used since the existing socket won't be moved to a new application. I'd like to have a deployment without downtime, as the system i'm working on is a system that can suffer financial damage when a socket is broken and data is lost. Low-level socket programming is ok.
I have read CloudFlare's https://blog.cloudflare.com/graceful-upgrades-in-go/ article explaining Nginx's Gracefully Reload mechanism. Since an HTTP server is a server that opens and closes sockets frequently, that article assumes that the server's connection would someday be closed, but my situation is slightly different. So I'm not sure if this can be used.
A socket can be shared between multiple processes, for example by opening the socket in same parent processing and forking a child process. But if the last process using the socket is closed the socket and thus the underlying connection is implicitly closed.
This means you must make sure that there is always a process open which uses the socket. This can be for example done if the deployment of the new software does not first exit the old process and then creates the new one but if the new process would start and the old process would transfer the socket to the new one, see Can I share a file descriptor to another process on linux or are they local to the process?
for how this can be done in Linux. Other ways would be using file descriptor inheritance when doing a fork().
Note that these sharing of file descriptors will only work with plain sockets where the state is fully kept in the OS kernel. It will be much harder or impossible with TLS sockets since in this case also the current user space state somehow needs to be shared.
Another way is to have some intermediate "proxy" which on the hand has the stable socket connection to your fragil application and on the other hand is a robust socket handling (i.e. reconnect when needed) to the application you want to update. Then this proxy transfers the traffic between both sides and will reconnect the socket if needed whenever a problem occurs.

How can two Unicorn servers bind to the same Unix socket?

This (rather old) article seems to suggest that two Unicorn master processes
can bind to the same Unix socket path:
When the old master receives the QUIT, it starts gracefully shutting down its workers. Once
all the workers have finished serving requests, it dies. We now have a fresh version of our
app, fully loaded and ready to receive requests, without any downtime: the old and new workers
all share the Unix Domain Socket so nginx doesn’t have to even care about the transition.
Reading around, I don't understand how this is possible. From what I understand, to truly have zero
downtime you have to use SO_REUSEPORT to let the old and new servers temporarily be bound to the
same socket. But SO_REUSEPORT is not supported on Unix sockets.
(I tested this by binding to a Unix socket path that is already in use by another server, and I got
an EADDRINUSE.)
So how can the configuration that the article describes be achieved?
Nginx forwards HTTP requests to a Unix socket.
Normally a single Unicorn server accepts requests on this socket and handles them (fair enough).
During redeployment, a new Unicorn server begins to accept requests on this socket and handles them, while the old server is still running (how?)
My best guess is that the second server calls unlink on the socket file immediately before calling bind with the same socket file, so in fact there is a small window where no process is bound to the socket and a connection would be refused.
Interestingly, if I bind to a socket file and then immediately delete the file, the next connection to the socket actually gets accepted. The second and subsequent connections are refused with ENOENT as expected. So maybe the kernel covers for you somewhat while one process is taking control of a socket that was is bound by another process. (This is on Linux BTW.)

observing on-off socket problem

recently I encounter a problem. I am using two programs A and B, developed by someone else, which use TCP sockets to communicate each other, A is server, B is client. That is what I observed: when I start both A and B, they run and communicate with each other, if I first kill A, then restart A again, now by checking the processes, A is successfully launched, but cannot be connected by B, no matter I restart B. however, If I continue to kill this non-detectable A and start A again, it can be detected by B.
At the same time, if I close B's socket before kill A, then when I start A and B, they work very well.
what the problem might be and is there some way to see the opened sockets when I kill A?
It depends on the OS you are using.
lsof -p <pid> is quite common on UNIX and lets you list all file descriptors used by a process.
netstat is probably available and will also list opened ports.
This is probably due to the TIME_WAIT state. When you kill A, the server port is still allocated by the OS and can be reused only if A sets a specific flag when opening server port to be able to reuse this port (SO_REUSEADDR). Otherwise, A won't be able to reuse the server port until it is closed by the OS (can take a few minutes, reason why when you continue to kill A, at some point, the port is available again). I don't know what A is doing if it cannot open the server port because of that.

Is there a way to wait for a listening socket on win32?

I have a server and client program on the same machine. The server is part of an application- it can start and stop arbitrarily. When the server is up, I want the client to connect to the server's listening socket. There are win32 functions to wait on file system changes (ReadDirectoryChangesW) and registry changes (RegNotifyChangeKeyValue)- is there anything similar for network changes? I'd rather not have the client constantly polling.
There is no such Win32 API, however this can be easily accomplished by using an event. The client would wait on that event to be signaled. The server would signal the event when it starts up.
The related API that you will need to use is CreateEvent, OpenEvent, SetEvent, ResetEvent and WaitForSingleObject.
If your server will run as a service, then for Vista and up it will run in session 0 isolation. That means you will need to use an event with a name prefixed with "Global\".
You probably do have a good reason for needing this, but before you implement this please consider:
Is there some reason you need a connect right away? I see this as a non issue because if you perform an action in the client, you can at that point make a new server connection.
Is the server starting and stopping more frequently than the client? You could switch roles of who listens/connects
Consider using some form of Windows synchronization, such as semaphore. The client can wait on the synchronization primitive and the server can signal it when it starts up.
Personally I'd use a UDP broadcast from the server and have the "client" listening for it. The server could broadcast a UDP packet every X period whilst running and when the client gets one, if it's not already connected, it could connect.
This has the advantage that you can move the client onto a different machine without any issues (and since the main connection from client to server is sockets already it would be a pity to tie the client and server to the same machine simply because you selected a local IPC method for the initial bootstrap).

How do I know if a system has powered on?

I am writing a script that powers on a system via network. And then i need to run a few commands on the other host. How do I know whether the system has powered on?
My programming language is Perl and the target host is RHEL5.
Is there any kernel interrupt or network boot information that indicates the system has powered on and the os has loaded?
[In a different scenario] I was also wondering just in case if i just switch on my Machine manually. when is it exactly said to have powered on. and when is the OS is supposed to have booted completely for a network related operation such as executing a network command there. What if the system is on DHCP how would a remote system then search for this machine [i guess it is possible via mac address. but if i am wrong ].
If I have missed out any info please feel free to ask me. If you have any suggestions to make the task easier please surface them :)
thanx
imkin
Well, I'd say the system is booted when it can perform the request you've made of it. That is, the sshd daemon is running. That's booted sufficiently for your purposes (I assume - substitute for whatever daemon you really need).
So, I'd send the power-on signal, and check back every 15-30 seconds to see if I could connect. If I've failed to connect within whatever is a reasonable time for that machine (2 minutes or 5 minutes or whatever), then I'd send an alert to the IT support team. Well, I'd send it to myself first, and only once I've investigated a few failures or so and found them to all be legitimate would I start sending it directly to IT.
DHCP is kind of a different question. You'd have to start learning about broadcasting, or having a daemon on that machine "call home" during boot to register its current IP address. And it would have to "call home" every time a DHCP renewal changed its IP address. This is decidedly more convoluted. Try to avoid DHCP on such server machines if at all possible.
On the rebooting machine you can install a script in your crontab with the special #reboot assertion (see man 5 crontab). That script could send a notification of some kind to the other machine, notifying it that it's up now.
I think checking for sshd sounds like a good approach.
As for the DHCP problem: if the other computer is on the same subnet you can look it up by MAC address using Net::ARP.
How about adding a script to the remote machine which gets run on startup to have it tell you when it is ready.