Menu
▾
▴
#51 JVM Process timeout
Seeing this error message:
INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/07/14 02:45:26 | JVM Process
has not received any CPU time for 13 seconds.
Extending timeouts.
INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/07/14 02:47:26 | JVM Process
has not received any CPU time for 11 seconds.
Extending timeouts.
ERROR | wrapper | 2004/07/14 03:15:39 | JVM appears
hung: Timed out waiting for signal from JVM.
ERROR | wrapper | 2004/07/14 03:15:45 | JVM did not
exit on request, terminated with SIGKILL
STATUS | wrapper | 2004/07/14 03:15:49 | Launching
a JVM...
Looks like the Container tries to restart after but fails to
restart. Im seeing about 40-50 CPU time error
messages. What do these mean?
Thanks in advance
Rob
Logged In: YES
user_id=999479
In addition, im having difficulty keeping the container running
for more than a couple hours. Nothing appears to be stopping
the container and there is no logs indicating specific issues.
ERROR | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:43:26 | JVM appears
hung: Timed out waiting for signal from JVM.
ERROR | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:43:31 | JVM did not exit
on request, terminated with SIGKILL
STATUS | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:43:36 | Launching a
JVM...
ERROR | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:44:05 | Startup failed:
Timed out waiting for a signal from the JVM.
ERROR | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:44:10 | JVM did not exit
on request, terminated with SIGKILL
STATUS | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:44:11 | TERM trapped.
Shutting down.
STATUS | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:44:11 | <-- Wrapper
Stopped
STATUS | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:44:19 | --> Wrapper
Started as Daemon
STATUS | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:44:20 | Launching a
JVM...
ERROR | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:44:49 | Startup failed:
Timed out waiting for a signal from the JVM.
ERROR | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:44:54 | JVM did not exit
on request, terminated with SIGKILL
STATUS | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:44:58 | Launching a
JVM...
ERROR | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:45:27 | Startup failed:
Timed out waiting for a signal from the JVM.
ERROR | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:45:33 | JVM did not exit
on request, terminated with SIGKILL
STATUS | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:45:37 | Launching a
JVM...
ERROR | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:46:06 | Startup failed:
Timed out waiting for a signal from the JVM.
ERROR | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:46:11 | JVM did not exit
on request, terminated with SIGKILL
STATUS | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:46:16 | Launching a
JVM...
ERROR | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:46:45 | Startup failed:
Timed out waiting for a signal from the JVM.
ERROR | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:46:50 | JVM did not exit
on request, terminated with SIGKILL
STATUS | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:46:55 | Launching a
JVM...
ERROR | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:47:24 | Startup failed:
Timed out waiting for a signal from the JVM.
ERROR | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:47:29 | JVM did not exit
on request, terminated with SIGKILL
FATAL | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:47:30 | There were 5
failed launches in a row, each lasting less than 300 seconds.
Giving up.
FATAL | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:47:30 | There may be a
configuration problem: please check the logs.
STATUS | wrapper | 2004/07/16 02:47:30 | <-- Wrapper
Stopped
Logged In: YES
user_id=228081
Is your system under very heavy load when this happens?
That looks like what the problem is in your original post,
but I have never seen a case where it failed for that reason
as many times as is shown in your second post. This would
be possible if a high priority process was eating all CPU
for an extended period of time.
You can resolve this by extending the wrapper.ping.timeout
to a larger value. But a better solution is to wait a few
days for the 3.1.1 release. It has a new tick based timer
which handled high load much much better. You can enable it
using the wrapper.use_system_time=false property. This was
in 3.1.0 as an experimental feature, but it turned out to be
buggy under certain situations. I suggest waiting for 3.1.1
to try it out.
Let me know if you are still having these problems with
3.1.1 with the new tick based timer enabled.
Cheers,
Leif
Logged In: YES
user_id=999479
The machine runs lots of cron jobs which probably take a
higher priority from the scheduler than the container. I will
upgrade and let you know. --thanks
Logged In: YES
user_id=228081
Rob,
Could you please download version 3.1.1 which was released
today? Set the wrapper.use_system_time=false property to
make use of the new tick timer and give it a try. This
should solve the problems you are having even if other
processes are consuming lots of CPU.
Please let me know the results.
Cheers,
Leif
Logged In: YES
user_id=999479
Sorry I have not responded earlier!!
The upgrade has appeared to solve these particular issues.
One last question on this topic. Now im seeing repeated
messages:
INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/08/26 11:42:08 | Failed to connect
to server
INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/08/26 11:42:09 | Failed to connect
to server
INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/08/26 11:42:11 | Failed to connect
to server
INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/08/26 11:42:12 | Failed to connect
to server
INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/08/26 11:42:13 | Failed to connect
to server
INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/08/26 11:42:14 | Failed to connect
to server
INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/08/26 11:42:14 | Failed to connect
to server
INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/08/26 11:42:15 | Failed to connect
to server
INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/08/26 11:42:16 | Failed to connect
to server
INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/08/26 11:42:17 | Failed to connect
to server
INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/08/26 11:42:17 | Failed to connect
to server
INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/08/26 11:42:17 | Failed to connect
to server
INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/08/26 11:42:18 | Failed to connect
to server
Have you ever seen these types of messages from the
wrapper?
Thanks in advance!!
Logged In: YES
user_id=228081
I did a search of the source and that message is not coming
from the Wrapper. There is a message "Failed to connect to
the Wrapper." however. But if that was happening then the
JVM would shutdown within a few seconds.
Are the Wrapper and JVM staying up and running? If so then
I would look elsewhere in your application or the jars you
are using for the source.
Cheers,
Leif
Logged In: YES
user_id=228081
Rob,
Closing this off because it sounds like the original problem
is fixed. I never heard back about those "failed to connect
to server" messages. Let me know if you have more questions,
Cheers,
Leif