Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Knute Johnson Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: "heartbeat" approach Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2013 08:40:35 -0800 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 18 Message-ID: References: <0e900395-a38a-44a1-a5bf-01cc781c8728@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 16:40:18 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="aba33539224e5c782fe0c4053f7756fd"; logging-data="18434"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/nFU75Sa9UHeIZXv3T0Gxb" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2 In-Reply-To: <0e900395-a38a-44a1-a5bf-01cc781c8728@googlegroups.com> Cancel-Lock: sha1:3KSdA9gRNmKd6rD6hPSq7K7iR0I= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:21958 On 2/1/2013 8:11 AM, bob smith wrote: > What is the best way to handle a situation where you want a socket to > send a "heartbeat" every ten minutes? I was thinking it would be > simple to have a single thread do all the "heartbeat" sending. > > However, that means there could be multiple threads writing to one > socket. Do I need to do anything special to have multiple threads > writing to one socket? Is there a better way? > > Thanks. > Just synchronize on the Socket or the OutputStream. The cost of synchronizing in that case would be very low. -- Knute Johnson