CODEWITHSUNDEEP
seleniumwebdriverwait
bsg
bsg

Reputation: 835

Selenium FluentWait wait before starting to poll

I'm using Selenium WebDriver to get some content from a site that dynamically loads it using Ajax. I created a custom Wait class to check for a condition on the page to make sure that the page has loaded before continuing. I used FluentWait to set the polling interval to 2 and timeout to 10. However, I noticed that it checks for the first time at time increment 0, then waits 2 seconds if the condition was false, then checks again, etc.

Since the page takes some time to load, it always is false at the first check, but usually is true at the second. Is there any way to make Wait wait the 2 seconds before checking for the first time? I.e. check at times 2,4,and 6, if necessary, rather than at 0,2,4,and 6?

Thanks, bsg

EDIT I've been asked to mention why I want this behavior - after all, I'm using the Wait the way it's meant to be used. The benefit I get from it returning true the first time is the following: WebDriver apparently opens a new socket every time it issues a command to the browser. For whatever reason, these sockets don't always get closed after the call executes. When executing a large number of calls in a short time (for instance, when repeatedly checking for a condition, which is what Wait does), it is possible to run out of virtual sockets, and the driver crashes. (The lack of enough virtual sockets seems to be a known issue on Windows 7, but I can't modify my system.)

The fewer calls to the driver I issue in a short period of time, the less likely it is to overrun the number of available sockets. I have observed that the first check never returns true, and therefore it's just opening a socket for no reason, making the program more likely to crash. That's why I want to wait. I hope this explanation is helpful for someone searching for information as to why they keep getting SocketExceptions in WebDriver.

Upvotes: 1

Views: 804

Answers (1)

wpercy
wpercy

Reputation: 10090

The obvious answer would be to just insert a time.sleep(2) (or similar method) before your first check. Would that work for what you're trying to do?

Upvotes: 1

Related Questions