[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-15214?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17150869#comment-17150869
]
Robert Stupp commented on CASSANDRA-15214:
------------------------------------------
Just read this ticket and the approach looks absolutely reasonable to me.
One thing though is that the the (off-heap) row-cache isn't covered here - let
me know whether it's reasonable to add some support regarding this ticket.
IMHO, people shouldn't use the row-cache, but I'm not sure whether there are
reasonable use cases out there in the wild. Don't want to start a discussion
about the row-cache in this, just a heads-up.
> OOMs caught and not rethrown
> ----------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-15214
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-15214
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Messaging/Client, Messaging/Internode
> Reporter: Benedict Elliott Smith
> Priority: Normal
> Fix For: 4.0, 4.0-rc
>
> Attachments: oom-experiments.zip
>
>
> Netty (at least, and perhaps elsewhere in Executors) catches all exceptions,
> so presently there is no way to ensure that an OOM reaches the JVM handler to
> trigger a crash/heapdump.
> It may be that the simplest most consistent way to do this would be to have a
> single thread spawned at startup that waits for any exceptions we must
> propagate to the Runtime.
> We could probably submit a patch upstream to Netty, but for a guaranteed
> future proof approach, it may be worth paying the cost of a single thread.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commits-h...@cassandra.apache.org
