Menu
▾
▴
Re: [Wrapper-user] Service consumes 100% of dual-CPU resources
|
From: john y. <joh...@fa...> - 2004-03-09 18:47:54
|
Hi, Jennifer, Thanks for the reply! There are three loglevel related properties: -- wrapper.console.loglevel -- wrapper.logfile.loglevel=20 -- wrapper.syslog.loglevel=20 you are talking about the syslog property, right? by disabling it you mean set it to NONE? I'll give it a shot. Also, I am quite interested in finding out what was happening which caused the log messed up (content mixed) -- I believe that would be the root of the problem which caused the service hung. Hopefully somebody will be able to point me to some direction. Thanks, John Yanlin On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 08:23:27 -0800, "Jennifer Kolar" <jk...@si...> said: > I too have seen a lot of CPU usage where 100% of CPU is being consumed=20= =20 > on a 4 proc box.. however, that is typically tied to a lot of event=20=20 > logging ... you might look at what level > of logging you have set for the event manager.. my CPU usage goes down=20= =20 > significantly when I disable that.. Can anyone enlighten on why the=20=20 > drastic CPU usage for event logging? >=20 > I am also seeing significantly increased java memory usage.. and out of= =20=20 > memory errors where I never saw that with the same code outside of > the service. So I'd be interested in any response here too. >=20 > Jennifer > On Mar 9, 2004, at 7:51 AM, john yanlin wrote: >=20 > > Hi, All, > > > > We have been using the wrapper for some win NT services. Recently we > > occasionally ran into some problem where the services consume almost=20= =20 > > all > > (99%, 100%) the CPU resources of a dual-CPU machine. The following is a > > segment of the wrapper log file: > > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=20 > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/02/18 06:31:25 | Send a packet 103 : ok > > DEBUG | wrapperp | 2004/02/18 06:31:25 | read a packet 103 : ok > > DEBUG | wrapper | 2004/02/18 06:31:25 | Got ping response from JVM > > DEBUG | wrapper | 2004/02/18 06:31:26 | ServiceControlHandler(4) > > DEBUG | wrapper | 2004/02/18 06:31:26 | SERVICE_CONTROL_INTERROGATE > > DEBUG | wrapperp | 2004/02/18 06:31:31 | sent 6 bytes > > INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/02/18 06:31:31 | Received a packet 103 : ping > > INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/02/18 06:31:31 | Send a packet 103 : ok > > DEBUG | wrapperp | 2004/02/18 06:31:31 | read a packet 103 : ok > > DEBUG | wrapper | 2004/02/18 06:31:31 | Got ping response from JVM > > DEBUG | wrapperp | 2004/02/18 06:31:37 | sent 6 bytes > > DEBUG | wrapper | 2004/02/18 06:31:37 | ServiceControlHandler(4) > > Dvm 1 | 20E0UG4/02 | 18 06wrapper | 31:37 | Received a packet 103 : > > ping > > Dvm 1 | 20E0UG4/02 | 18 06wrapper | 31:37 | Received a packet 103 : > > ping > > 2004/02/18 06:31:37 | SERVICE_CONTROL_INTERROGATE > > STATUS | wrapper | 2004/02/18 10:38:00 | --> Wrapper Started as=20=20 > > Service > > DEBUG | wrapperp | 2004/02/18 10:38:00 | server listening on port=20= =20 > > 17005. > > DEBUG | wrapper | 2004/02/18 10:38:00 | JVM was only running for > > -322562155 seconds leading to a failed restart count of 1. > > STATUS | wrapper | 2004/02/18 10:38:00 | Launching a JVM... > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=20 > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > > > From which we can see that at 6:31:37 something went wrong. There are= =20=20 > > two > > lines in the log are exactly the same and the contents are sort of=20= =20 > > mixed. > > It should be something like: > > > > DEBUG | wrapper | 2004/02/18 | 06:31:37 | Received a packet 103 : ping > > > > Instead, it came out mixed as: > > > > Dvm 1 | 20E0UG4/02 | 18 06wrapper | 31:37 | Received a packet 103 : > > ping > > Dvm 1 | 20E0UG4/02 | 18 06wrapper | 31:37 | Received a packet 103 : > > ping > > > > The DEBUG and the date time were mixed. There was a 'B' in the 'DEBUG' > > missing. the 'J' for 'Jvm 1' was also missing. During that time, the > > service shown active in the windows service manager panel. But the=20= =20 > > actual > > service was hung. > > > > It seems that there was something happening inside the wrapper native > > part. Have anyone ever got the similar situation like this? Could=20=20 > > anyone > > suggest what was happening here? > > > > Thanks, > > > > --=20 > > http://www.fastmail.fm - And now for something completely different=85 > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials > > Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of > > GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system > > administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id638&op=3Dclick > > _______________________________________________ > > Wrapper-user mailing list > > Wra...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wrapper-user >=20 >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials > Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of > GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system > administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id638&op=3Dclick > _______________________________________________ > Wrapper-user mailing list > Wra...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wrapper-user --=20 http://www.fastmail.fm - Same, same, but different=85 |
