How to notify when HTTP server starts successfully












-1















I'm trying to start an HTTP server in Go, and when the server is started, a message should be printed, in case of an error, an error message should be printed.



Given the following code:



const (
HTTPServerPort = ":4000"
)

func main() {
var httpServerError = make(chan error)
var waitGroup sync.WaitGroup

setupHTTPHandlers()

waitGroup.Add(1)
go func() {
defer waitGroup.Done()

httpServerError <- http.ListenAndServe(HTTPServerPort, nil)
}()

if <-httpServerError != nil {
fmt.Println("The Logging API service could not be started.", <-httpServerError)
} else {
fmt.Println("Logging API Service running @ http://localhost" + HTTPServerPort)
}

waitGroup.Wait()
}


When I do start the application, I don't see anything printed to the console, where I would like to see:



Logging API Service running @ http://localhost:4000



When I change the port to an invalid one, the following output is printed to the console:



fatal error: all goroutines are asleep - deadlock!



goroutine 1 [chan receive]:
main.main()
...app.go:45 +0x107
exit status 2



Could anyone point me in the right direction so that I know what I'm doing wrong with this implementation?










share|improve this question




















  • 1





    Possible duplicate of get notified when http.Server starts listening

    – Berkant
    Nov 16 '18 at 6:52











  • Do you really need that? HTTP server start should be really fast. I would rather check to see what in your code makes it slow. Do you have any IO in handlers initializers?

    – Dmitry Harnitski
    Nov 16 '18 at 13:13
















-1















I'm trying to start an HTTP server in Go, and when the server is started, a message should be printed, in case of an error, an error message should be printed.



Given the following code:



const (
HTTPServerPort = ":4000"
)

func main() {
var httpServerError = make(chan error)
var waitGroup sync.WaitGroup

setupHTTPHandlers()

waitGroup.Add(1)
go func() {
defer waitGroup.Done()

httpServerError <- http.ListenAndServe(HTTPServerPort, nil)
}()

if <-httpServerError != nil {
fmt.Println("The Logging API service could not be started.", <-httpServerError)
} else {
fmt.Println("Logging API Service running @ http://localhost" + HTTPServerPort)
}

waitGroup.Wait()
}


When I do start the application, I don't see anything printed to the console, where I would like to see:



Logging API Service running @ http://localhost:4000



When I change the port to an invalid one, the following output is printed to the console:



fatal error: all goroutines are asleep - deadlock!



goroutine 1 [chan receive]:
main.main()
...app.go:45 +0x107
exit status 2



Could anyone point me in the right direction so that I know what I'm doing wrong with this implementation?










share|improve this question




















  • 1





    Possible duplicate of get notified when http.Server starts listening

    – Berkant
    Nov 16 '18 at 6:52











  • Do you really need that? HTTP server start should be really fast. I would rather check to see what in your code makes it slow. Do you have any IO in handlers initializers?

    – Dmitry Harnitski
    Nov 16 '18 at 13:13














-1












-1








-1








I'm trying to start an HTTP server in Go, and when the server is started, a message should be printed, in case of an error, an error message should be printed.



Given the following code:



const (
HTTPServerPort = ":4000"
)

func main() {
var httpServerError = make(chan error)
var waitGroup sync.WaitGroup

setupHTTPHandlers()

waitGroup.Add(1)
go func() {
defer waitGroup.Done()

httpServerError <- http.ListenAndServe(HTTPServerPort, nil)
}()

if <-httpServerError != nil {
fmt.Println("The Logging API service could not be started.", <-httpServerError)
} else {
fmt.Println("Logging API Service running @ http://localhost" + HTTPServerPort)
}

waitGroup.Wait()
}


When I do start the application, I don't see anything printed to the console, where I would like to see:



Logging API Service running @ http://localhost:4000



When I change the port to an invalid one, the following output is printed to the console:



fatal error: all goroutines are asleep - deadlock!



goroutine 1 [chan receive]:
main.main()
...app.go:45 +0x107
exit status 2



Could anyone point me in the right direction so that I know what I'm doing wrong with this implementation?










share|improve this question
















I'm trying to start an HTTP server in Go, and when the server is started, a message should be printed, in case of an error, an error message should be printed.



Given the following code:



const (
HTTPServerPort = ":4000"
)

func main() {
var httpServerError = make(chan error)
var waitGroup sync.WaitGroup

setupHTTPHandlers()

waitGroup.Add(1)
go func() {
defer waitGroup.Done()

httpServerError <- http.ListenAndServe(HTTPServerPort, nil)
}()

if <-httpServerError != nil {
fmt.Println("The Logging API service could not be started.", <-httpServerError)
} else {
fmt.Println("Logging API Service running @ http://localhost" + HTTPServerPort)
}

waitGroup.Wait()
}


When I do start the application, I don't see anything printed to the console, where I would like to see:



Logging API Service running @ http://localhost:4000



When I change the port to an invalid one, the following output is printed to the console:



fatal error: all goroutines are asleep - deadlock!



goroutine 1 [chan receive]:
main.main()
...app.go:45 +0x107
exit status 2



Could anyone point me in the right direction so that I know what I'm doing wrong with this implementation?







go






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Nov 16 '18 at 8:17









Flimzy

40.2k1367100




40.2k1367100










asked Nov 16 '18 at 6:38









ComplexityComplexity

3,24522157




3,24522157








  • 1





    Possible duplicate of get notified when http.Server starts listening

    – Berkant
    Nov 16 '18 at 6:52











  • Do you really need that? HTTP server start should be really fast. I would rather check to see what in your code makes it slow. Do you have any IO in handlers initializers?

    – Dmitry Harnitski
    Nov 16 '18 at 13:13














  • 1





    Possible duplicate of get notified when http.Server starts listening

    – Berkant
    Nov 16 '18 at 6:52











  • Do you really need that? HTTP server start should be really fast. I would rather check to see what in your code makes it slow. Do you have any IO in handlers initializers?

    – Dmitry Harnitski
    Nov 16 '18 at 13:13








1




1





Possible duplicate of get notified when http.Server starts listening

– Berkant
Nov 16 '18 at 6:52





Possible duplicate of get notified when http.Server starts listening

– Berkant
Nov 16 '18 at 6:52













Do you really need that? HTTP server start should be really fast. I would rather check to see what in your code makes it slow. Do you have any IO in handlers initializers?

– Dmitry Harnitski
Nov 16 '18 at 13:13





Do you really need that? HTTP server start should be really fast. I would rather check to see what in your code makes it slow. Do you have any IO in handlers initializers?

– Dmitry Harnitski
Nov 16 '18 at 13:13












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















2














You can't do this unless you change the logic in your code or use Listen and Serve separately. Because ListenAndServe is a blocking function. If there something unexpected happens, it will return you an error. Provided it is not, it will keep blocking running the server. There is neither an event that is triggered whenever a server is started.



Let's run Listen and Serve separately then.



l, err := net.Listen("tcp", ":8080")
if err != nil {
// handle error
}

// Signal that server is open for business.

if err := http.Serve(l, rootHandler); err != nil {
// handle error
}


See https://stackoverflow.com/a/44598343/4792552.



P.S. net.Listen doesn't block because it runs in background. In other means, it simply spawns a socket connection in OS level and returns you with the details/ID of it. Thus, you use that ID to proxy orders to that socket.






share|improve this answer


























  • That makes sense. I tought that even serveAndListen is a blocking function, I would be able to solve this using a channel but it seems that it isn't :-)

    – Complexity
    Nov 16 '18 at 6:54





















1














The issue is that your if statement will always read from the httpServerError channel. However the only time something writes to that is if the server fails.



Try a select statement:



select{
case err := <-httpServerError
fmt.Println("The Logging API service could not be started.", err)
default:
fmt.Println("Logging API Service running @ http://localhost" + HTTPServerPort
}


The default case will be ran if the channel does not have anything on it.



Notice this does not read from the channel twice like your example. Once you read a value from a channel, its gone. Think of it as a queue.






share|improve this answer
























  • Thanks for the clarification. And does the 'main' thread blocks until a channel is empty or how does that function in golang?

    – Complexity
    Nov 16 '18 at 7:02











  • So everything will exit once the main function does. So your WaitGroup will block for you. An alternative would be to put the select-statement in a go routine and let the ListenAndServe block the exit of the main function.

    – poy
    Nov 16 '18 at 7:07











  • This still will get to a 'Deadlock'.

    – Complexity
    Nov 16 '18 at 10:25












Your Answer






StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53332667%2fhow-to-notify-when-http-server-starts-successfully%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









2














You can't do this unless you change the logic in your code or use Listen and Serve separately. Because ListenAndServe is a blocking function. If there something unexpected happens, it will return you an error. Provided it is not, it will keep blocking running the server. There is neither an event that is triggered whenever a server is started.



Let's run Listen and Serve separately then.



l, err := net.Listen("tcp", ":8080")
if err != nil {
// handle error
}

// Signal that server is open for business.

if err := http.Serve(l, rootHandler); err != nil {
// handle error
}


See https://stackoverflow.com/a/44598343/4792552.



P.S. net.Listen doesn't block because it runs in background. In other means, it simply spawns a socket connection in OS level and returns you with the details/ID of it. Thus, you use that ID to proxy orders to that socket.






share|improve this answer


























  • That makes sense. I tought that even serveAndListen is a blocking function, I would be able to solve this using a channel but it seems that it isn't :-)

    – Complexity
    Nov 16 '18 at 6:54


















2














You can't do this unless you change the logic in your code or use Listen and Serve separately. Because ListenAndServe is a blocking function. If there something unexpected happens, it will return you an error. Provided it is not, it will keep blocking running the server. There is neither an event that is triggered whenever a server is started.



Let's run Listen and Serve separately then.



l, err := net.Listen("tcp", ":8080")
if err != nil {
// handle error
}

// Signal that server is open for business.

if err := http.Serve(l, rootHandler); err != nil {
// handle error
}


See https://stackoverflow.com/a/44598343/4792552.



P.S. net.Listen doesn't block because it runs in background. In other means, it simply spawns a socket connection in OS level and returns you with the details/ID of it. Thus, you use that ID to proxy orders to that socket.






share|improve this answer


























  • That makes sense. I tought that even serveAndListen is a blocking function, I would be able to solve this using a channel but it seems that it isn't :-)

    – Complexity
    Nov 16 '18 at 6:54
















2












2








2







You can't do this unless you change the logic in your code or use Listen and Serve separately. Because ListenAndServe is a blocking function. If there something unexpected happens, it will return you an error. Provided it is not, it will keep blocking running the server. There is neither an event that is triggered whenever a server is started.



Let's run Listen and Serve separately then.



l, err := net.Listen("tcp", ":8080")
if err != nil {
// handle error
}

// Signal that server is open for business.

if err := http.Serve(l, rootHandler); err != nil {
// handle error
}


See https://stackoverflow.com/a/44598343/4792552.



P.S. net.Listen doesn't block because it runs in background. In other means, it simply spawns a socket connection in OS level and returns you with the details/ID of it. Thus, you use that ID to proxy orders to that socket.






share|improve this answer















You can't do this unless you change the logic in your code or use Listen and Serve separately. Because ListenAndServe is a blocking function. If there something unexpected happens, it will return you an error. Provided it is not, it will keep blocking running the server. There is neither an event that is triggered whenever a server is started.



Let's run Listen and Serve separately then.



l, err := net.Listen("tcp", ":8080")
if err != nil {
// handle error
}

// Signal that server is open for business.

if err := http.Serve(l, rootHandler); err != nil {
// handle error
}


See https://stackoverflow.com/a/44598343/4792552.



P.S. net.Listen doesn't block because it runs in background. In other means, it simply spawns a socket connection in OS level and returns you with the details/ID of it. Thus, you use that ID to proxy orders to that socket.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Nov 16 '18 at 7:07

























answered Nov 16 '18 at 6:48









BerkantBerkant

357312




357312













  • That makes sense. I tought that even serveAndListen is a blocking function, I would be able to solve this using a channel but it seems that it isn't :-)

    – Complexity
    Nov 16 '18 at 6:54





















  • That makes sense. I tought that even serveAndListen is a blocking function, I would be able to solve this using a channel but it seems that it isn't :-)

    – Complexity
    Nov 16 '18 at 6:54



















That makes sense. I tought that even serveAndListen is a blocking function, I would be able to solve this using a channel but it seems that it isn't :-)

– Complexity
Nov 16 '18 at 6:54







That makes sense. I tought that even serveAndListen is a blocking function, I would be able to solve this using a channel but it seems that it isn't :-)

– Complexity
Nov 16 '18 at 6:54















1














The issue is that your if statement will always read from the httpServerError channel. However the only time something writes to that is if the server fails.



Try a select statement:



select{
case err := <-httpServerError
fmt.Println("The Logging API service could not be started.", err)
default:
fmt.Println("Logging API Service running @ http://localhost" + HTTPServerPort
}


The default case will be ran if the channel does not have anything on it.



Notice this does not read from the channel twice like your example. Once you read a value from a channel, its gone. Think of it as a queue.






share|improve this answer
























  • Thanks for the clarification. And does the 'main' thread blocks until a channel is empty or how does that function in golang?

    – Complexity
    Nov 16 '18 at 7:02











  • So everything will exit once the main function does. So your WaitGroup will block for you. An alternative would be to put the select-statement in a go routine and let the ListenAndServe block the exit of the main function.

    – poy
    Nov 16 '18 at 7:07











  • This still will get to a 'Deadlock'.

    – Complexity
    Nov 16 '18 at 10:25
















1














The issue is that your if statement will always read from the httpServerError channel. However the only time something writes to that is if the server fails.



Try a select statement:



select{
case err := <-httpServerError
fmt.Println("The Logging API service could not be started.", err)
default:
fmt.Println("Logging API Service running @ http://localhost" + HTTPServerPort
}


The default case will be ran if the channel does not have anything on it.



Notice this does not read from the channel twice like your example. Once you read a value from a channel, its gone. Think of it as a queue.






share|improve this answer
























  • Thanks for the clarification. And does the 'main' thread blocks until a channel is empty or how does that function in golang?

    – Complexity
    Nov 16 '18 at 7:02











  • So everything will exit once the main function does. So your WaitGroup will block for you. An alternative would be to put the select-statement in a go routine and let the ListenAndServe block the exit of the main function.

    – poy
    Nov 16 '18 at 7:07











  • This still will get to a 'Deadlock'.

    – Complexity
    Nov 16 '18 at 10:25














1












1








1







The issue is that your if statement will always read from the httpServerError channel. However the only time something writes to that is if the server fails.



Try a select statement:



select{
case err := <-httpServerError
fmt.Println("The Logging API service could not be started.", err)
default:
fmt.Println("Logging API Service running @ http://localhost" + HTTPServerPort
}


The default case will be ran if the channel does not have anything on it.



Notice this does not read from the channel twice like your example. Once you read a value from a channel, its gone. Think of it as a queue.






share|improve this answer













The issue is that your if statement will always read from the httpServerError channel. However the only time something writes to that is if the server fails.



Try a select statement:



select{
case err := <-httpServerError
fmt.Println("The Logging API service could not be started.", err)
default:
fmt.Println("Logging API Service running @ http://localhost" + HTTPServerPort
}


The default case will be ran if the channel does not have anything on it.



Notice this does not read from the channel twice like your example. Once you read a value from a channel, its gone. Think of it as a queue.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Nov 16 '18 at 6:55









poypoy

6,56263465




6,56263465













  • Thanks for the clarification. And does the 'main' thread blocks until a channel is empty or how does that function in golang?

    – Complexity
    Nov 16 '18 at 7:02











  • So everything will exit once the main function does. So your WaitGroup will block for you. An alternative would be to put the select-statement in a go routine and let the ListenAndServe block the exit of the main function.

    – poy
    Nov 16 '18 at 7:07











  • This still will get to a 'Deadlock'.

    – Complexity
    Nov 16 '18 at 10:25



















  • Thanks for the clarification. And does the 'main' thread blocks until a channel is empty or how does that function in golang?

    – Complexity
    Nov 16 '18 at 7:02











  • So everything will exit once the main function does. So your WaitGroup will block for you. An alternative would be to put the select-statement in a go routine and let the ListenAndServe block the exit of the main function.

    – poy
    Nov 16 '18 at 7:07











  • This still will get to a 'Deadlock'.

    – Complexity
    Nov 16 '18 at 10:25

















Thanks for the clarification. And does the 'main' thread blocks until a channel is empty or how does that function in golang?

– Complexity
Nov 16 '18 at 7:02





Thanks for the clarification. And does the 'main' thread blocks until a channel is empty or how does that function in golang?

– Complexity
Nov 16 '18 at 7:02













So everything will exit once the main function does. So your WaitGroup will block for you. An alternative would be to put the select-statement in a go routine and let the ListenAndServe block the exit of the main function.

– poy
Nov 16 '18 at 7:07





So everything will exit once the main function does. So your WaitGroup will block for you. An alternative would be to put the select-statement in a go routine and let the ListenAndServe block the exit of the main function.

– poy
Nov 16 '18 at 7:07













This still will get to a 'Deadlock'.

– Complexity
Nov 16 '18 at 10:25





This still will get to a 'Deadlock'.

– Complexity
Nov 16 '18 at 10:25


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53332667%2fhow-to-notify-when-http-server-starts-successfully%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Florida Star v. B. J. F.

Danny Elfman

Retrieve a Users Dashboard in Tumblr with R and TumblR. Oauth Issues