I'm trying to make an HTTP request with an ESP8266 and the ESP8266HTTPClient library. I have a request in the loop() function that makes a request every 5 seconds which works 100% flawlessly. However, I also have an interrupt setup like so:
void interrupt() {
if(WiFiMulti.run() == WL_CONNECTED) {
Serial.println("Knock!");
HTTPClient http;
knockhttp.begin(http_address + "/knock");
int httpCode = http.GET();
if(httpCode > 0) {
Serial.println(http.getString());
} else {
Serial.printf("[HTTP] GET... failed, error: %s\n", http.errorToString(httpCode).c_str());
}
http.end();
}
}
This fails. I get a "connection refused" Error every time the interrupt triggers. It's connecting to the same server as the request in the loop, just a different path.
Okay, I fixed it.
For some reason, HTTP requests with the ESP8266HTTPClient library do not work within interrupts, so here's the solution I came up with that worked:
Set some boolean flag in the interrupt.
Check that flag in the main loop
Perform the HTTP request in the main loop when the flag matches
Reset the flag.
Hope this helps anyone else that comes across the same strange problem.
Related
Hi I have used esp8266 module http client example and my code is exactly like the sample code.
This is a part of my code:
if (httpCode > 0) {
if (httpCode == HTTP_CODE_OK || httpCode == HTTP_CODE_MOVED_PERMANENTLY) {
String payload = http.getString();
if(payload=="text") {
digitalWrite(LED_BUILTIN, HIGH);
} else {
digitalWrite(LED_BUILTIN, LOW);
}
}
}
I can't compare my variable with my text and the LED_BUILTIN is always on. I am sure it can get the text of the http client page because I can send it to Arduino nano with softwareserial.
Actually when i want to send it to arduino nano it gives me an error : no matching function for call to HardwareSerial::write(String&)
i could fix the error with this sample code
String mystring= http.getString();
char* buf = (char*) malloc(sizeof(char)*myString.length()+1);
myString.toCharArray(buf, myString.length()+1);
Serial.write(buf);
free(buf);
but esp8266 module can't compare payload with my text
If the LED was turned on, then the compare method was definitely work. Try to send different String from the server, your LED should be turned off. And also, when you got problems like this, try to print the "payload" to the serial monitor. At least, you could figure it out where the faulty is.
hope this help.
I'm implementing a Thrift client in order to make connection to a built-in scribe server.
Everything is going OK if I use a standard Log method, like this:
public boolean log(List<LogEntry> messages) {
boolean ret = false;
PooledClient client = borrowClient();
try {
if ((client != null) && (client.getClient() != null)) {
ResultCode result = client.getClient().Log(messages);
ret = (result != null && result.equals(ResultCode.OK));
returnClient(client);
}
} catch (Exception ex) {
logger.error(LogUtil.stackTrace(ex));
invalidClient(client);
}
return ret;
}
However, when I use send_Log instead:
public void send_Log(List<LogEntry> messages) {
PooledClient client = borrowClient();
try {
if ((client != null) && (client.getClient() != null)) {
client.getClient().send_Log(messages);
returnClient(client);
}
} catch (Exception ex) {
logger.error(LogUtil.stackTrace(ex));
invalidClient(client);
}
}
It acctually causes some problems:
Total network connection to port 1463 (default port for a scribe server) is going to increase so much, and always in a CLOSE_WAIT state.
Cause my application got stuck without throwing any error, I think it may be an issue with network connection.
what if send without recv
As this is clearly TCP, the sender will block (in blocking mode), or incur EAGAIN/EWOULDBLOCK in non-blocking mode. EDIT It is now clear that you want to send without receiving the reply. You can do that by just sending and then closing the socket, but that may cause the peer to incur ECONNRESET, which may upset it. You should really implement the application protocol correctly.
1/ Total network connection to port 1463 (default port for a scribe server) is going to increase so much, and always in a CLOSE_WAIT state.
Lots of ports in CLOSE_WAIT state indicates a socket leak on the part of the local application.
2/ Cause my application got stuck without throwing any error. I think it may be an issues with network connection.
It is an issue with sending and not receiving.
Since you labelled this as a Thrift related question, the answer is oneway.
service foo {
oneway void FireAndForget(1: some args)
}
The oneway keyword does exactly what the name suggests. You get a client implementation that only sends and does not wait for anything to be returned from the server. This rule also includes exceptions. Hence a oneway method must always be void and can't throw any exceptions.
However, when I use send_Log instead ...
client.getClient().send_Log(messages);
Neither one of the Thrift-generated send_Xxx and recv_Xxx methods are meant to be public. That's why they are usually either private or protected methods. They should not be called directly, unless you are sure that you know what you are doing (and very obviously the latter is not the case here).
And since the real question is about performance: Why don't you just delegate the call(s) into a secondary thread? That way the I/O will not block the UI.
I'm working my way through boost's asio tutorial. I'm looking into their chat example. More specifically, I'm trying to split their chat client from a sender+receiver, to just a sender and just a receiver, but I'm seeing some behaviour that I can't explain.
The setup consists of:
boost::asio::io_service io_service;
tcp::resolver::iterator endpoint = resolver.resolve(...);
boost::thread t(boost::bind(&boost::asio::io_service::run, &io_service));
boost::asio::async_connect(socket, endpoint, bind(handle_connect, ... ));
The sending portion effectively conisists of:
while (std::cin.getline(str))
io_service.post( do_write, str );
and
void do_write (string str)
{
boost::asio::async_write(socket, str, bind( handle_write, ... ));
}
The receive section consists of
void handle_connect(...)
{
boost::asio::async_read(socket, read_msg_, bind(handle_read, ...));
}
void handle_read(...)
{
std::cout << read_msg_;
boost::asio::async_read(socket, read_msg_, bind(handle_read, ...));
}
If I comment out the content of handle_connect to isolate the send portion, my other client (compiled using the original code) does not receive anything. If I revert, then comment out the content of handle_read, my other client only receives the first message.
Why is it necessary to call async_read() in order to be able to post() an async_write()?
The full unmodified code is linked above.
The problem here is that, your io_service is running out of work and stops processing requests even before you start sending your chat messages.
If you comment out the body of handle_connect, then the only work it had to do was to dispatch the handle_connect handler and then execute it once the connection was done.
std::size_t scheduler::run(asio::error_code& ec)
{
.....
mutex::scoped_lock lock(mutex_);
std::size_t n = 0;
for (; do_run_one(lock, this_thread, ec); lock.lock())
if (n != (std::numeric_limits<std::size_t>::max)())
++n;
return n;
}
So, you have to provide it with something in it's operation queue. This was done with handle_read_header handler in the original code as this handler would always be in the need of servicing till the client gets something from the server.
You can do what you want to do by providing work to the io_service.
asio::io_context io_context;
asio::io_context::work wrk(io_context); // make `run` run forever
tcp::resolver resolver(io_context);
tcp::resolver::results_type endpoints = resolver.resolve(argv[1], argv[2]);
chat_client c(io_context, endpoints);
asio::thread t(boost::bind(&asio::io_context::run, &io_context));
When the socket times out while waiting for a read it occasionally fails. But when it does fail, it continuously fails, and the log message in slotDisconnected never gets reported despite mpSocket's disconnected signal being connected to slotDisconnect(). It's as if the return statement in slotConnected isn't being hit and it's going round in a continous loop.
void Worker::slotDisconnected()
{
// Attempt to reconnect
log("Disconnected from Server. Attempting to reconnect...");
// fires mpSocket's connect signal (which is connected to slotConnected)
connectToServer();
}
void Worker::slotConnected()
{
// Loop forever while connected and receiving messages correctly
while(1)
{
if(mpSocket->bytesAvailable())
{
// A message is ready to read
}
else if(!mpSocket->waitForReadyRead(mSocketTimeOut))
{
// waitForReadyRead returned false - instead of continuing and trying again, we must disconnect as sometimes
// (for some unknown reason) it gets stuck in an infinite loop without disconnecting itself as it should
log("Socket timed out while waiting for next message.\nError String: " + mpSocket->errorString());
msleep(3000);
mpSocket->disconnect();
return;
}
}
}
The signals/slots are connected like so:
connect(mpSocket, &QAbstractSocket::disconnected, this, &TRNGrabberWorker::slotDisconnected);
connect(mpSocket, &QAbstractSocket::connected, this, &TRNGrabberWorker::slotConnected);
Anyone have any idea's what's going on? Would be much appreciated
To disconnect from server use mpSocket->disconnectFromHost(); instead of mpSocket->disconnect();.
Actually mpSocket->disconnect(); disconnects all signals/slots of object mpSocket.
I'm currently working with an Arduino trying to build an ad hoc network to which a device can connect to and send web requests to. The problem I am currently having is that I can only set up one connection and then when that connection is terminated (with client.stop()), all subsequent connections are not picked up by the server, even a cURL command just sits there spinning. The first connection I start when I reset the server works fine, and I am able to talk to the server; but after that, the Arduino can no longer find new clients (even though it's trying with the library given).
I`m using the SparkFun library for the WiFly shield cloned from GitHub, along with an Arduino Uno.
My current code is based off their default example 'WiFly_AdHoc_Example', but I had to remove a few things to get the network to start up which might be the cause of this problem.
Here is the .ino file that I am running.
#include <SPI.h>
#include <WiFly.h>
//#include <SoftwareSerial.h>
//SoftwareSerial mySerial( 5, 4); //Part from example not used (see below)
WiFlyServer server(80); //Use telnet port instead, if debugging with telnet
void setup()
{
Serial.begin(9600);
//The code below is from the example, but when I run it the WiFly will hang
// on Wifly.begin(). Without it, the WiFly starts up fine.
//mySerial.begin(9600);
//WiFly.setUart(&mySerial); // Tell the WiFly library that we are not
// using the SPIUart
Serial.println("**************Starting WiFly**************");
// Enable Adhoc mod
WiFly.begin(true);
Serial.println("WiFly started, creating network.");
if (!WiFly.createAdHocNetwork("wifly"))
{
Serial.print("Failed to create ad hoc network.");
while (1)
{
// Hang on failure.
}
}
Serial.println("Network created");
Serial.print("IP: ");
Serial.println(WiFly.ip());
Serial.println("Starting Server...");
server.begin();
Serial.print("Server started, waiting for client.");
}
void loop()
{
delay(200);
WiFlyClient client = server.available();
if (client)
{
Serial.println("Client Found.");
// A string to store received commands
String current_command = "";
while (client.connected())
{
if (client.available())
{
//Gets a character from the sent request.
char c = client.read();
if (c=='#' || c=='\n') //End of extraneous output
{
current_command = "";
}
else if(c!= '\n')
{
current_command+=c;
}
if (current_command== "get")
{
// output the value of each analog input pin
for (int i = 0; i < 6; i++)
{
client.print("analog input ");
client.print(i);
client.print(" is ");
client.print(analogRead(i));
client.println("<br />");
}
}
else if(current_command== "hello")
{
client.println("Hello there, I'm still here.");
}
else if (current_command== "quit")
{
client.println("Goodbye...");
client.stop();
current_command == "";
break;
}
else if (current_command == "*OPEN*")
{
current_command == "";
}
}
}
// Give the web browser time to receive the data
delay(200);
// close the connection
client.stop();
}
}
This script is just a mini protocol I set up to test. Once connected with the wifly module you can send text such as "get" "hello" or "quit" and the wifly module should respond back.
Using Telnet I can successfully connect (the first time) and send commands to the Arduino including "quit" to terminate the connection (calls the client.stop() method). But when I try to reconnect though Telnet, it says the connection was successful, but on the Arduino it's still looping thinking the client is still false. What??
I know right, I'm getting mixed messages from Telnet vs Arduino. None of the commands work obviously since the Ardunio is still looping waiting for a client that evaluates to true. I'm going to take a look at WiFlyServer from the library I imported and see if I can dig up the problem, because somehow that server.available() method isn't finding new clients.
I am noticing a lot of TODO's in the library code....
So I found the reason for the problem. It was in the WiFlyServer.cpp file from the SparkFun library. The code that was causing the reconnect issue was in fact the server.availible() method. Right at the top of the method, there is a check:
// TODO: Ensure no active non-server client connection.
if (!WiFly.serverConnectionActive) {
activeClient._port = 0;
}
For some reason when I comment this out, I can connect and reconnect perfectly fine and everything works as it should. I will now dive into the library and see if I can fix this, I'm not exactly sure what this is doing, but it gets called when the server connection is not active and is somehow blocking subsequent connections. The problem with this solution is that the Arduino always thinks it has found a client since client and client.connected() evaluate to true even if one doesn't exist. Even client.available() evaluates to true right when the connection is terminated and the ghost "client" is found, but after that first run through the if-statement the ghost "client" is no longer available(). Even with this flaw it still picks up a new client when it comes along which is why it works.
How might I get to the root of this problem without using this commenting hack?
Are their any risks or future problems I might run into doing it this way?
What is the purpose of the block that I commented out in the first place?
Well, when you're calling client.stop(); how does the Arduino know whether the client has to start again?
Remember setup() executes only once.
Have you tried to include the following code in your loop to tell the Arduino to create the WiFly AdHoc network again? This may or may not work. I don't have one myself and haven't played with the Wifly shield but it's worth a try.
Remember to only ever execute the code once every time you need to connect again since it's sitting inside a loop that's always going to be running.
WiFly.begin(true);
Serial.println("WiFly started, creating network.");
if (!WiFly.createAdHocNetwork("wifly"))
{
Serial.print("Failed to create ad hoc network.");
while (1)
{
// Hang on failure.
}
}