Binance userDataStream sometimes does not work - c#

I have a problem with user_data subscription by websocket-sharp. I have no any errors, but sometimes I have no data from server. I send listenKey and have empty response (no errors), but when I send order, I have no any callbacks from user_data.

At the end, I used wrong web socket component. I used this one (websocket-sharp.clone). And when I changed it to WebSocketSharp, it works all this time.

Related

WCF request returns wrong response

I have a c# application that the client uses wcf to talk to the server. In the background every X seconds the client calls a Ping method to the server (through WCF). The following error has reproduced a couple of times (for different method calls):
System.ServiceModel.ProtocolException: A reply message was received for operation 'MyMethodToServer' with action 'http://tempuri.org/IMyInterface/PingServerResponse'. However, your client code requires action 'http://tempuri.org/IMyInterface/MyMethodToServerResponse'.
MyMethodToServer is not consistent and it falls on different methods.
How can this happen that a request receives a different response?
I think you have a pretty mess problem with async communication, main suggestion (as your question isn't clear very well), is try to identify every request, catch the calls and waiting for them, do asyncronic communication and getting a several work with threading.
As you present it, is a typical architecture problem.
If you present more code, can I suggest some code fixing in my answer and I'll be glad to update my answer.
If this occurs randomly and not you consistently, you might be running in a load-balanced setup, and deployed an update to only one of the servers?
Wild guess: your client uses same connection to do two requests in parallel. So what happens is:
Thread 1 sends request ARequest
Thread 2 sends request BRequest
Server sends reply BReply
Thread 1 receives reply BReply while expecting AReply
If you have request logs on the server, it'll be easy to confirm - you'll likely see two requests coming with short delay from the client host experiencing the issue
I think MaxConcurrentCall and ConcurrencyMode may be relevant here (although I did not touch WCF for a long while)

SignalR Clients.Client($id) Invalid

I am trying to call methods server-side from:
var client = GlobalHost.ConnectionManager.GetHubContext<HUB>().Clients.Client(ConnectionID);
where ConnectionID is coming straight from the client $.connection.hub.id. However, after about 30ish seconds, executing client commands with this object fails silently. It's as if it's talking to a client that doesn't exist.
Additionally, I have tried
var client = GlobalHost.ConnectionManager.GetHubContext<HUB>().Clients.User(User.Identity.Name);
but similarly, this also starts returning null after about a minute.
Is there some kind of cache that is being cleared after a time?
I am listening to OnConnect and OnDisconnect both on the server and client and none are fired.
EDIT: I realized that the Clients.Client() method is not returning null, but just an invalid object.
EDIT 2: I am looking into the solution from this post because it involves load balanced servers (my situation)

Exception-proof HttpListener possible?

Last few days I've been building a web server application in C# that uses HttpListener. I've learned quite a lot on the way, and still am. Currently I got it all working, setting headers here and there depending on certain situations.
In most cases things are working fine, however at times a exception error is thrown. This happens on a few occasions. Most if not all of them is closing a connection before all data is send. Then the error occurs. But some of them are really caused by browsers as far as I can tell.
Like let's take Chrome. Whenever I go to a MP3 file directly, it sends 2 GET requests. And one of them is causing the error, the other is working and receiving part of the content. After this, I can listen the MP3 and there are no issues. Streaming works.
But back to the request that gives me the error, there is nothing in the headers that I could use in my code to not output data, like I do already with HEAD requests. So I'm quite puzzled here.
IE also has this problem with both opening MP3 files directly, and streaming via HTML5 audio tag. It also varies from time to time. Sometimes I open the page, and only 2 requests are made. The HTML page, and the MP3. No error there. Sometimes tho, there are 3 requests. It connects to the MP3 twice. Now sometimes one of those connections is being aborted straight after I open the page, and sometimes 2 requests to the MP3 file, doesn't even accept data. In both request headers, they want end of the file. So bytes: 123-123/124.
I've also tested it on w3school's audio element. IE also makes twice connections there, one aborted, other loading the MP3 file.
So my question is, is it possible to make the web server exception/error-proof, or maybe better question, is it bad that these exceptions are thrown? Or do you perhaps know how to fix these errors?
The error I'm getting is: I/O Operation has been aborted by either a thread exit or an application request.
The way I write to the client is:
using (Stream Output = _CResponse.OutputStream)
{
Output.Write(_FileOutput, rangeBegin, rangeLength);
}
I am not sure if there's another (better) way. This is what I came across in many topics, tutorials and pages while researching.
About headers: Default headers: Content Length, Content Type, Status Code. In some cases, like MP3 files and video's, I add a Accept-Ranges: Bytes header. In case the request header has Range in it, I add Content-Range header, and PartialContent status code.
From the server's point of view any client can disconnect at any time. This is part of the normal operation of a server. Detect this specific case, log it and swallow the exception (because it has been handled). It's not a server bug.

Why i'm forced to Close() C# asynchronous client socket, after every transaction?

I'm trying to write an asynch socket application which transfering complex objects over across sides..
I used the example here...
Everything is fine till i try send multi package data. When the transferred data requires multiple package transfer server application is suspending and server is going out of control without any errors...
After many hours later i find a solution; if i close client sender socket after each EndSend callback, the problem is solving. But i couldn't understand why this is necessary? Or are there any other solution for the situation?
My (2) projects is same with example above only i changed EndSend callback method like following:
public void EndSendCallback(IAsyncResult result)
{
Status status = (Status)result.AsyncState;
int size = status.Socket.EndSend(result);
status.Socket.Close(); // <--------------- This line solved the situation
Console.Out.WriteLine("Send data: " + size + " bytes.");
Console.ReadLine();
allDone.Set();
}
Thanks..
This is due to the example code given not handling multiple packages (and being broken).
A few observations:
The server can only handle 1 client at a time.
The server simply checks whether the data coming in is in a single read smaller than the data requested and if so, assumes that's the last part.
The server then ignores the client socket while leaving the connection open. This puts the responsibility of closing the connection on the client side which can be confusing and which will waste resources on the server.
Now the first observation is an implementation detail and not really relevant in your case. The second observation is relevant for you since it will likely result in unexplained bugs- probably not in development- but when this code is actually running somewhere in a real scenario. Sockets are not streamlined. When the client sents over 1000 bytes. This might require 1 call to read on the server or 10. A call to read simply returns as soon as there is 'some' data available. What you need to do is implement some sort of protocol that communicates either how much data is being sent over- or when all the data has been sent over. I really recommend just to stick with the HTTP protocol since this is a well tested and well supported protocol that suits most scenario's.
The third observation might also cause bugs where the server is running out of resources since it leaves all connections open.

Error 302 when executing AT+CMGL="ALL"

I'm programming a modem using AT commands. When I execute AT+CMGL="ALL", I get an inconsistent result. Most of the time, it returned Error 302 (operation not allowed). At other times, it returns the list of messages. I'm using Multitech MTCBA-G-U.FA. This inconsistency makes it difficult to know what is happening.
I get the same behaviour when using putty as well. In all instances where AT+CMGL fails, AT always works returning OK.
regards
Did you register with the GSM network via AT+COPS?
You can check via AT+COPS?.
The settings for receiving messages were probably changed. Check with:
AT+CNMI=?
And you can set the setting to directly display a received message
AT+CNMI=1,2,0,0,0

Categories

Resources