Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Still reconnecting after close() #49

Closed
raduciobanu22 opened this issue May 13, 2019 · 5 comments
Closed

Still reconnecting after close() #49

raduciobanu22 opened this issue May 13, 2019 · 5 comments

Comments

@raduciobanu22
Copy link

raduciobanu22 commented May 13, 2019

I just tested v2.0.5 and unfortunately the issue is still there. This is my scenario:

  1. Open WS connection A.
  2. Close WS connection A.
  3. Open WS connection B.
  4. Close WS connection B.
  5. Open WS connection C.

After a while WS connections A and B are reopened. They are initially closed, but re-opened.

@lukeed
Copy link
Owner

lukeed commented May 13, 2019

v2.0.5 does not include 66bf604 – I've not published a new version yet.

If you could paste in the most recent code from master & test it out, that'd be appreciated

@raduciobanu22
Copy link
Author

Sure, give me a sec.

@raduciobanu22
Copy link
Author

raduciobanu22 commented May 13, 2019

Problem still seems to be there.
This is the scenario:

  1. Open WS connection A.
  2. Close WS connection A.
  3. Open WS connection B.
  4. Close WS connection B.
  5. Open WS connection C.

Another interesting aspect is that calling close() does not trigger the onclose callback.
But after a while (10+ seconds) I am seeing that callback being triggered and the code is 1006. Right after that the connections that were previously closed are reopened one by one.

@raduciobanu22
Copy link
Author

raduciobanu22 commented May 13, 2019

@lukeed Ignore my previous comment. The issue is fixed. It does not reconnect anymore after calling close(). The last part with the onclose callback being called with code 1006 is still there but the main issue is fixed.

@lukeed
Copy link
Owner

lukeed commented May 13, 2019

Cool, thanks

I need a repro for the second half. Sounds like #29
Way too many variables involved. Servers can be acting up, the action you take on client side can be interpreted any number of ways, etc

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants