[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-3719?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Martin Serrano updated AMQ-3719:
--------------------------------
Description:
I have only encountered this failure when the broker is experiencing heavy load
and a new connection attempt is made.
* The FailoverTransport tracks commands that have been issued so that it can
restore the state upon a failure/reconnect event.
* If an IOException occurs when sending a tracked command, the oneway() method
returns, assuming that the IOException is indicative of a transport failure and
will result in a failure/reconnect event.
* Some IOExceptions (like WireFormatNegotiation timesouts) are not always
indicative of transport failure however. In this case since no subsequent
failure/reconnect event occurs, the command will never be resent. If this is a
synchronous command (like that generated by starting a connection) the calling
thread will hang.
Incidentally, my reading of the code is that only non-tracked commands can
generate the IOException that triggers the handleTransportFailure command. Is
that what we really want?
My belief is that the IOExceptions should always result in the triggering of
the handleTransportFailure, regardless of origin.
I will attach a unit test and fix shortly. The test will often fail (i.e.
hang) without the fix, but not always since I use a
wireFormat.maxInactivityDurationInitalDelay=1 option to trigger the behavior.
If the system runs fast enough, it sometimes will not get the timeout. I
wasn't sure exactly how such a test should be written...The test will fail if
connection does not succeed within 60s
was:
I have only encountered this failure when the broker is experiencing heavy load
and a new connection attempt is made.
* The FailoverTransport tracks commands that have been issued so that it can
restore the state upon a failure/reconnect event.
* If an IOException occurs when sending a tracked command, the oneway() method
returns, assuming that the IOException is indicative of a transport failure and
will result in a failure/reconnect event.
* Some IOExceptions (like WireFormatNegotiation timesouts) are not always
indicative of transport failure however. In this case since no subsequent
failure/reconnect event occurs, the command will never be resent. If this is a
synchronous command (like that generated by starting a connection) the calling
thread will hang.
Incidentally, my reading of the code is that only non-tracked commands can
generate the IOException that triggers the handleTransportFailure command. Is
that what we really want?
My belief is that the IOExceptions should always result in the triggering of
the handleTransportFailure, regardless of origin.
I will attach a unit test and fix shortly. The test will often fail (i.e.
hang) without the fix, but not always since I use a
wireFormat.maxInactivityDurationInitalDelay=1 option to trigger the behavior.
If the system runs fast enough, it sometimes will not get the timeout. I
wasn't sure exactly how such a test should be written... or if the test
environment has controls to prevent hanging tests (in case of regression) from
hanging a build.
> Non failing IOException causes FailoverTransport to hang until real failure
> occurs
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: AMQ-3719
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-3719
> Project: ActiveMQ
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Transport
> Environment: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5 CPU M 540 @2.53GHz
> 8 GB, 64-bit
> Reporter: Martin Serrano
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 5.6.0
>
>
> I have only encountered this failure when the broker is experiencing heavy
> load and a new connection attempt is made.
> * The FailoverTransport tracks commands that have been issued so that it can
> restore the state upon a failure/reconnect event.
> * If an IOException occurs when sending a tracked command, the oneway()
> method returns, assuming that the IOException is indicative of a transport
> failure and will result in a failure/reconnect event.
> * Some IOExceptions (like WireFormatNegotiation timesouts) are not always
> indicative of transport failure however. In this case since no subsequent
> failure/reconnect event occurs, the command will never be resent. If this is
> a synchronous command (like that generated by starting a connection) the
> calling thread will hang.
> Incidentally, my reading of the code is that only non-tracked commands can
> generate the IOException that triggers the handleTransportFailure command.
> Is that what we really want?
> My belief is that the IOExceptions should always result in the triggering of
> the handleTransportFailure, regardless of origin.
> I will attach a unit test and fix shortly. The test will often fail (i.e.
> hang) without the fix, but not always since I use a
> wireFormat.maxInactivityDurationInitalDelay=1 option to trigger the behavior.
> If the system runs fast enough, it sometimes will not get the timeout. I
> wasn't sure exactly how such a test should be written...The test will fail if
> connection does not succeed within 60s
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
