Menu
▾
▴
wrapper-user
|
From: <sh...@vs...> - 2004-03-04 14:29:34
|
How can I completely disabled automatic JVM shutdowns that are caused by the JVM not responding to pings ? I have currently configured my service using the following lines but it didn't prevent the wrapper from shutting down the JVM: wrapper.cpu.timeout = 0 wrapper.ping.interval = 3600 wrapper.ping.timeout = 0 Cheers, Shmul |
|
From: Leif M. <le...@ta...> - 2004-03-06 14:54:36
|
Shmul,
First of all 99% of the time. You do not want to be playing with
the timeouts. So
start by removing those from your wrapper.conf file.
I am making a wild guess here because you did not post much
information. But is
your application timing out and shutting down immediately after
startup? This is
usually caused because you specified your application's main class
directly in the
wrapper.conf file rather than using one of the helper classes like
WrapperSimpleApp.
Make sure that you have read over the integration section of the
documentation.
Most people make use of integration method #1.
If you have questions after reading that, please post with the
contents of your
wrapper.log file with the wrapper.debug=true property set. I need to be
able to
see that information to answer most questions.
Cheers,
Leif
sh...@vs... wrote:
>How can I completely disabled automatic JVM shutdowns that are caused
>by the JVM not responding to pings ?
>I have currently configured my service using the following lines but
>it didn't prevent the wrapper from shutting down the JVM:
>
>wrapper.cpu.timeout = 0
>wrapper.ping.interval = 3600
>wrapper.ping.timeout = 0
>
>Cheers,
>Shmul
>
>
|
|
From: Leif M. <le...@ta...> - 2004-03-14 12:54:20
|
Shmul,
You are actually doing things correctly except for a minor detail.
The wrapper.conf
file does not currently support having spaces around the '=' sign in the
property names.
The way the conf file is parsed, the Wrapper will not see such
properties. I have
submitted the following bug and will get this fixed for a future version.
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=916001&group_id=39428&atid=425187
For now, please go through and remove the spaces from the property
definitions.
You should then be able to disable the pings.
Cheers,
Leif
Shmulik Regev wrote:
>I followed your advice and run the wrapper with debug information
>switched on. Attached please find the log and the wrapper.conf file.
>
>Please note that I'm not posting this file to the user group as I'm
>not sure it is appropriate. However if you feel otherwise please tell
>me.
>
>I appreciate the help.
>
>
>Cheers,
>Shmul
>
>
|
|
From: Shmulik R. <sh...@vs...> - 2004-03-14 17:07:28
|
I followed your advise, but for some reason things got worse (or maybe better, it'll be easier to debug now :) and the process terminates almost immediately. The configuration is: wrapper.cpu.timeout=0 wrapper.ping.interval=3600 wrapper.ping.timeout=0 and the log (there are of course some application specific lines, but these are easily recognized) INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | Write output to log file "c:\vself/logs/feed_jaco.log" INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | Write output to log file "c:\vself/logs/feed_jaco.log" INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | JacORB V 1.3.30, www.jacorb.org INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | (C) Gerald Brose, FU Berlin, 13 June 2001 INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | Virtual Self Feed Broker 2.6.2 (186) DEBUG | wrapper | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | Pause reading child output to share cycles. INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | Active... INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | WrapperSimpleApp: start(args) end. Main Completed=false, exitCode=null INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | returned from listener.start() INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | Send a packet STARTED : DEBUG | wrapperp | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | read a packet STARTED : DEBUG | wrapper | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | JVM signalled that it was started. INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:35 | Read Timed out. (Last Ping was 10016 milliseconds ago) INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:39 | D_Lib: output is switched to file c:\vself/logs\/fn.0.log INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:39 | Starting fn, see c:\vself/logs\/fn for logging... INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:46 | Read Timed out. (Last Ping was 20016 milliseconds ago) INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:55 | Read Timed out. (Last Ping was 30016 milliseconds ago) ERROR | wrapper | 2004/03/14 19:07:56 | JVM appears hung: Timed out waiting for signal from JVM. ERROR | wrapper | 2004/03/14 19:07:56 | Java Virtual Machine did not exit on request, terminated DEBUG | wrapper | 2004/03/14 19:07:56 | JVM was only running for 33 seconds leading to a failed restart count of 1. Cheers, Shmul > Shmul, > You are actually doing things correctly except for a minor detail. > > The wrapper.conf > file does not currently support having spaces around the '=' sign in > the property names. The way the conf file is parsed, the Wrapper will > not see such properties. I have submitted the following bug and will > get this fixed for a future version. > https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=916001&group > _id=39428&atid=425187 > > For now, please go through and remove the spaces from the property > > definitions. > You should then be able to disable the pings. > > Cheers, > Leif > > Shmulik Regev wrote: > > >I followed your advice and run the wrapper with debug information > >switched on. Attached please find the log and the wrapper.conf file. > > > >Please note that I'm not posting this file to the user group as I'm > >not sure it is appropriate. However if you feel otherwise please tell > > me. > > > >I appreciate the help. > > > > > >Cheers, > >Shmul > > > > |
|
From: Leif M. <le...@ta...> - 2004-03-14 17:16:59
|
Shmulik,
I was able to reproduce this using those timeout values. It is late
here, so it is not
immediately obvious what the problem is. I will take a look at it. But
for now please
go back and remove the three timeout / interval properties below. What
was the
original reason that you had wanted to set them? Setting the timeout
to 0 works.
But the long ping interval seems to be causing problems right now...
Cheers,
Leif
Shmulik Regev wrote:
>I followed your advise, but for some reason things got worse (or
>maybe better, it'll be easier to debug now :) and the process
>terminates almost immediately.
>
>The configuration is:
>wrapper.cpu.timeout=0
>wrapper.ping.interval=3600
>wrapper.ping.timeout=0
>
>
>and the log (there are of course some application specific lines, but
>these are easily recognized)
>
>INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | Write output to log file "c:\vself/logs/feed_jaco.log"
>INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | Write output to log file "c:\vself/logs/feed_jaco.log"
>INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | JacORB V 1.3.30, www.jacorb.org
>INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | (C) Gerald Brose, FU Berlin, 13 June 2001
>INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | Virtual Self Feed Broker 2.6.2 (186)
>DEBUG | wrapper | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | Pause reading child output to share cycles.
>INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | Active...
>INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | WrapperSimpleApp: start(args) end. Main Completed=false, exitCode=null
>INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | returned from listener.start()
>INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | Send a packet STARTED :
>DEBUG | wrapperp | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | read a packet STARTED :
>DEBUG | wrapper | 2004/03/14 19:07:25 | JVM signalled that it was started.
>INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:35 | Read Timed out. (Last Ping was 10016 milliseconds ago)
>INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:39 | D_Lib: output is switched to file c:\vself/logs\/fn.0.log
>INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:39 | Starting fn, see c:\vself/logs\/fn for logging...
>INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:46 | Read Timed out. (Last Ping was 20016 milliseconds ago)
>INFO | jvm 1 | 2004/03/14 19:07:55 | Read Timed out. (Last Ping was 30016 milliseconds ago)
>ERROR | wrapper | 2004/03/14 19:07:56 | JVM appears hung: Timed out waiting for signal from JVM.
>ERROR | wrapper | 2004/03/14 19:07:56 | Java Virtual Machine did not exit on request, terminated
>DEBUG | wrapper | 2004/03/14 19:07:56 | JVM was only running for 33 seconds leading to a failed restart count of 1.
>
>Cheers,
>Shmul
>
>
|
|
From: Shmulik R. <sh...@vs...> - 2004-03-14 17:30:57
|
On 15 Mar 2004 at 2:16, Leif Mortenson wrote: > I was able to reproduce this using those timeout values. It is > late > here, so it is not > immediately obvious what the problem is. I will take a look at it. thanks. > But for now please go back and remove the three timeout / interval > properties below. What was the original reason that you had wanted to > set them? Setting the timeout to 0 works. But the long ping interval > seems to be causing problems right now... We originally started messing with these properties after we noticed the jvm is restarted by the wrapper. this is probably due to a bug in our application (that causes extensive cpU usage) which is hard to debug when the wrapper restarts the application below our feet. Cheers, Shmul |
|
From: Leif M. <le...@ta...> - 2004-03-18 06:47:48
|
Shmul,
Ok. There were actually three bugs in the Wrapper related to this
issue. They
have all been fixed for the 3.1.0 release.
1) Spaces around the '=' character in a property definition were not
being trimmed
when the wrapper.conf file was being parsed. This was causing the
property name
to appear to be "wrapper.ping.timeout " rather than
"wrapper.ping.timeout", thus
causing the Wrapper to ignore your settings.
2) The very first ping timeout set after the JVM was started was still
hard coded at
30 seconds. This was causing the Wrapper to timeout after 30 seconds
even though
the ping timeout was disabled. If at least one ping had been received
then things
would have worked correctly. Not sure how this made it past me.
3) This one is minor. But when the ping timeout is extended, the the
SO_TIMEOUT
set on the socket between the Wrapper and its JVM also needs to be
extended. This
was happening for large values of wrapper.ping.timeout, but not for a
value of 0.
This was leading to the "Read Timed Out" messages that you were seeing
in the debug
log output.
As for what you can do now...
Since that first timeout is hard coded in 3.0.5, it is not possible to
set the
wrapper.ping.interval greater that 30 seconds. I would set it to 25
seconds.
Then set the wrapper.ping.timeout to 0. This will get rid of 4/5ths of
the ping
messages from your wrapper.log and will also make sure that the Wrapper
never restarts the JVM even after it stops responding to pings.
Let me know how this works for you.
Cheers,
Leif
Shmulik Regev wrote:
>On 15 Mar 2004 at 2:16, Leif Mortenson wrote:
>
>
>
>> I was able to reproduce this using those timeout values. It is
>> late
>>here, so it is not
>>immediately obvious what the problem is. I will take a look at it.
>>
>>
>
>thanks.
>
>
>
>>But for now please go back and remove the three timeout / interval
>>properties below. What was the original reason that you had wanted to
>>set them? Setting the timeout to 0 works. But the long ping interval
>>seems to be causing problems right now...
>>
>>
>We originally started messing with these properties after we noticed
>the jvm is restarted by the wrapper. this is probably due to a bug in
>our application (that causes extensive cpU usage) which is hard to
>debug when the wrapper restarts the application below our feet.
>
>Cheers,
>Shmul
>
>
|
|
From: Shmulik R. <sh...@vs...> - 2004-03-21 06:31:42
|
On 18 Mar 2004 at 15:47, Leif Mortenson wrote: > Shmul, > Ok. There were actually three bugs in the Wrapper related to this > > issue. They > have all been fixed for the 3.1.0 release. > thanks. I'll follow your advice. Is there a planned release date for 3.1.0 ? Cheers, Shmul |
|
From: Leif M. <le...@ta...> - 2004-03-21 11:50:20
|
Shmulik Regev wrote: >>Shmul, >> Ok. There were actually three bugs in the Wrapper related to this >> >>issue. They >>have all been fixed for the 3.1.0 release. >> >hanks. I'll follow your advice. Is there a planned release date for >3.1.0 ? > > Sorry, this is the longest I have ever gone without a release. Work has been rather hectic the past 6-8 months. I'll try to get it out soon, but the "plan" was a good month ago. :-) Cheers, Leif |
