Did Gaojinchao attached the stack dump people received it (Lars?).
Could some one or Gaojinchao attach it to the jira.

-Shrijeet

On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 12:24 PM, lars hofhansl <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Thanks. Now the question is: How many connection threads do we have?
>
> I think there is one per regionserver, which would indeed be a problem.
> Need to look at the code again (I'm only partially familiar with the client 
> code).
>
> Either the client should chunk (like the server does), or there should be a 
> limited number of thread that
> perform IO on behalf of the client (or both).
>
> -- Lars
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gaojinchao <[email protected]>
> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; lars hofhansl 
> <[email protected]>
> Cc: Chenjian <[email protected]>; wenzaohua <[email protected]>
> Sent: Saturday, December 3, 2011 11:22 PM
> Subject: Re: FeedbackRe: Suspected memory leak
>
> This is dump stack.
>
>
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: lars hofhansl [mailto:[email protected]]
> 发送时间: 2011年12月4日 14:15
> 收件人: [email protected]
> 抄送: Chenjian; wenzaohua
> 主题: Re: FeedbackRe: Suspected memory leak
>
> Dropping user list.
>
> Could you (or somebody) point me to where the client is using NIO?
> I'm looking at HBaseClient and I do not see references to NIO, also it seems 
> that all work is handed off to
> separate threads: HBaseClient.Connection, and the JDK will not cache more 
> than 3 direct buffers per thread.
>
> It's possible (likely?) that I missed something in the code.
>
> Thanks.
>
> -- Lars
>
> ________________________________
> From: Gaojinchao <[email protected]>
> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; "[email protected]" 
> <[email protected]>
> Cc: Chenjian <[email protected]>; wenzaohua <[email protected]>
> Sent: Saturday, December 3, 2011 7:57 PM
> Subject: FeedbackRe: Suspected memory leak
>
> Thank you for your help.
>
> This issue appears to be a configuration problem:
> 1. HBase client uses NIO(socket) API that uses the direct memory.
> 2. Default -XXMaxDirectMemorySize value is equal to -Xmx value, So if there 
> doesn't have "full gc", all direct memory can't reclaim. Unfortunately, using 
> GC confiugre parameter of our client doesn't produce any "full gc".
>
> This is only a preliminary result,  All tests is running, If have any further 
> results , we will be fed back.
> Finally , I will update our story to issue 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4633.
>
> If our digging is crrect, whether we should set a default value for the 
> "-XXMaxDirectMemorySize" to prevent this situation?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: bijieshan [mailto:[email protected]]
> 发送时间: 2011年12月2日 15:37
> 收件人: [email protected]; [email protected]
> 抄送: Chenjian; wenzaohua
> 主题: Re: Suspected memory leak
>
> Thank you all.
> I think it's the same problem with the link provided by Stack. Because the 
> heap-size is stabilized, but the non-heap size keep growing. So I think not 
> the problem of the CMS GC bug.
> And we have known the content of the problem memory section, all the records 
> contains the info like below:
> "|www.hostname00000000000002087075.comlhggmdjapwpfvkqvxgnskzzydiywoacjnpljkarlehrnzzbpbxc||||||460|||||||||||Agent||||";
> "BBZHtable_UFDR_058,048342220093168-02570"
> ........
>
> Jieshan.
>
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: Kihwal Lee [mailto:[email protected]]
> 发送时间: 2011年12月2日 4:20
> 收件人: [email protected]
> 抄送: Ramakrishna s vasudevan; [email protected]
> 主题: Re: Suspected memory leak
>
> Adding to the excellent write-up by Jonathan:
> Since finalizer is involved, it takes two GC cycles to collect them.  Due to 
> a bug/bugs in the CMS GC, collection may not happen and the heap can grow 
> really big.  See http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7112034 
> for details.
>
> Koji tried "-XX:-CMSConcurrentMTEnabled" and confirmed that all the socket 
> related objects were being collected properly. This option forces the 
> concurrent marker to be one thread. This was for HDFS, but I think the same 
> applies here.
>
> Kihwal
>
> On 12/1/11 1:26 PM, "Stack" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Make sure its not the issue that Jonathan Payne identifiied a while
> back: 
> https://groups.google.com/group/asynchbase/browse_thread/thread/c45bc7ba788b2357#
> St.Ack
>

Reply via email to