Re: [Wrapper-user] Advice on stopping wrapper from triggering JVM restarts

[Casey J. <cas...@jo...>]

So I wanted to give an update on this. I created a simple stress testing
script that triggered lots of logging to occur. I tested this on the 3.5.17
version and was easily able to see the memory leak as the wrapper process
rose to about 3.5% (250MB) of memory usage over running this script for
about 2 hours.

However, now I am running this same script on 2.5.26, it's been running for
about 30 min now and is already up to 1% system memory usage. I am going to
keep running for a few hours and see what results I get. However, I am
concerned because on non CentOs systems we never see the wrapper process
even reach .1% consumption even after running for 6 months.

Perhaps what I am seeing is just some artifact of something else
(cache/buffers?)? Maybe there is a better way to test this before I put it
back into production? (I don't really want to get into doing a valgrind
session :)

Thanks

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Casey Jordan <cas...@jo...>
wrote:

> Leif,
>
> Thanks for replying so quickly! That's great to hear, I'm excited to try
> out the new version.
>
>
> On Sunday, December 21, 2014, Leif Mortenson <
> lei...@ta...> wrote:
>
>> Casey,
>> Rather than patching the Wrapper, I would suggest the released version
>> with the fix.  There have been a number of other important improvements as
>> well.
>> We usually wait a couple weeks after a release before deciding to raise a
>> version to stable.  This is done to make sure that there are no unexpected
>> errors reported from the user base.
>> So far 3.5.26 has been quite stable.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Leif
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Casey Jordan <cas...@jo...>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Tim & Community,
>>>
>>> Sorry I had to go back and review your previous comments before I
>>> realized you had posted those patches and also provided me with
>>> instructions.
>>>
>>> I am currently running wrapper version 3.5.17. I also saw that 3.5.26
>>> appears to have the memory leak fixes in it (Based on reading the release
>>> notes).
>>>
>>> Which of the following would be the best option?
>>>
>>> Patch v3.5.17
>>> Upgrade to v3.5.25 and patch
>>> Use v3.5.26 (Which I believe contains the fix I need)
>>>
>>> Obviously using 3.5.26 seems the simplest approach here, but I just
>>> wanted to double check with the community.
>>>
>>> Thanks, your help is much appreciated.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Casey Jordan <cas...@jo...>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ok, so I have been monitoring for a bit now and I can definitely say
>>>> that I have this memory leak and it is causing the issues I am experiencing.
>>>>
>>>> Now the issue remains that I do not believe that I can upgrade glibc on
>>>> my system, given that all the threads I read say that will cause major
>>>> problems. Also, I need to use CentOS 7 if at all possible.
>>>>
>>>> I noticed in the previously referenced thread that someone created a
>>>> patch directly in the wrapper to also fix this issue, does anyone know if
>>>> this fix made it into a release that I could use?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> --
> Casey Jordan
> easyDITA a product of Jorsek LLC
> "CaseyDJordan" on LinkedIn, Twitter & Facebook
> (585) 348 7399
> easydita.com
>
>
> This message is intended only for the use of the Addressee(s) and may
> contain information that is privileged, confidential, and/or exempt from
> disclosure under applicable law.  If you are not the intended recipient,
> please be advised that any disclosure  copying, distribution, or use of
> the information contained herein is prohibited.  If you have received
> this communication in error, please destroy all copies of the message,
> whether in electronic or hard copy format, as well as attachments, and
> immediately contact the sender by replying to this e-mail or by phone.
> Thank you.
>
>


-- 
--
Casey Jordan
easyDITA a product of Jorsek LLC
"CaseyDJordan" on LinkedIn, Twitter & Facebook
(585) 348 7399
easydita.com


This message is intended only for the use of the Addressee(s) and may
contain information that is privileged, confidential, and/or exempt from
disclosure under applicable law.  If you are not the intended recipient,
please be advised that any disclosure  copying, distribution, or use of
the information contained herein is prohibited.  If you have received
this communication in error, please destroy all copies of the message,
whether in electronic or hard copy format, as well as attachments, and
immediately contact the sender by replying to this e-mail or by phone.
Thank you.