Reputation: 2235
I know there are tons of posts about stack overflow errors and i understand why my specific one is happening, my question is basically how to move away from recursion in this specific case. I have a class which establishes and maintains a client connection (for HL7 messaging specifically but it's essentially a glorified client connection) to another system which hosts corresponding server connections. This class' constructor starts a new thread and runs the following method :
@Override
public void connect()
{
try
{
setStatus("Connecting");
connection = context.newClient(intfc.getIp(), port, false);
connected = true;
setStatus("Connected");
logEntryService.logInfo(LogEntry.CONNECTIVITY, "Successfully connected " + connectionType + " client connection to "
+ intfc.getName() + "(" + intfc.getIp() + ") on port " + port);
monitor();
}
catch (HL7Exception ex)
{
connected = false;
setStatus("Disconnected");
try
{
TimeUnit.SECONDS.sleep(connectionRetryIntervalInSeconds);
connect();
}
catch (InterruptedException ex2)
{}
}
}
Upon successfully connecting with the server, the monitor method simply checks, in yet another thread, if the connection is still up at a given interval. If it goes down, the monitoring thread is interrupted and the connect() method is called again.
I did not anticipate this at first but you can quickly see why the connect() method is causing stack overflow errors after several days running. I'm struggling to think of a way to get the same functionality to work without the connect method calling itself again every time the connection fails.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Thanks!
Upvotes: 0
Views: 178
Reputation: 2235
I changed my code to an iterative approach as suggested, works beautifully!
@Override
public void initThread()
{
initConnectionEntity();
mainThread = new Thread()
{
@Override
public void run()
{
while (running)
{
if (!connected)
{
try
{
connect();
}
catch (HL7Exception ex)
{
connected = false;
setStatus("Disconnected");
try
{
TimeUnit.SECONDS.sleep(connectionRetryIntervalInSeconds);
}
catch (InterruptedException ex2)
{}
}
}
try
{
TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS.sleep(500);
}
catch (InterruptedException ex2)
{}
}
}
};
mainThread.setName(intfc.getName() + " " + connectionType + " Main Thread");
mainThread.start();
}
@Override
public void connect() throws HL7Exception
{
setStatus("Connecting");
connection = context.newClient(intfc.getIp(), port, false);
connected = true;
setStatus("Connected");
logEntryService.logInfo(LogEntry.CONNECTIVITY, "Successfully connected " + connectionType + " client connection to "
+ intfc.getName() + "(" + intfc.getIp() + ") on port " + port);
monitor();
}
private void monitor()
{
monitoringThread = new Thread()
{
@Override
public void run()
{
try
{
while (running)
{
if (!connection.isOpen())
{
if (connected == true)
{
logEntryService.logWarning(LogEntry.CONNECTIVITY, "Lost " + connectionType + " connection to "
+ intfc.getName() + "(" + intfc.getIp() + ") on port " + port);
}
connected = false;
setStatus("Disconnected");
monitoringThread.interrupt();
}
else
{
connected = true;
}
TimeUnit.SECONDS.sleep(connectionMonitorIntervalInSeconds);
}
}
catch (InterruptedException ex)
{
logEntryService.logDebug(LogEntry.CONNECTIVITY, "Monitoring thread for " + connectionType
+ " connection to " + intfc.getName() + " interrupted");
}
}
};
monitoringThread.setName(intfc.getName() + " " + connectionType + " Monitoring Thread");
monitoringThread.start();
}
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 1084
Why are you calling the monitor()
method in the first place? You mention that it is launched in a separate thread, then can't you just launch it in a new thread when the application comes up? Then there won't be a recursive call.
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 3915
Typically you'd use a Stack
object to emulate recursion when required.
However, in your case, why are you using recursion at all? A while
loop fits the purpose.
while(true /**or some relevant condition**/){
try{ //try to connect
....
catch(HL7Exception ex){
//sleep
}
}
I'm not sure of the purpose of your application, but there are may be better methods than sleeping. You could use a ScheduledExecutorService, but if it's a single threaded program with one purpose it's probably unnecessary.
Upvotes: 1
Reputation: 30
When I had to deal with this issue in c# I used a Stack, and added new classes to it, instead of using recursion. Then a second loop would check to see if there were any objects in the stack that needed dealing with. That avoided stack overflow when I would have had huge amounts of recursion otherwise. Is there a similar Stack collection in Java?
Upvotes: 0