> Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 21:22:07 +0200
> From: Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [5] IndexOutOfBoundsException from CharChunk
> To: Tomcat Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Kin-Man Chung wrote:
>
> > I am getting a sporadic IndexOutOfBoundsException and it seems to come from
> > org.apache.tomcat.util.buf.CharChunk.flushBuffer. The trace is
> >
> > Servlet.service() for servlet jsp threw exception
> > java.lang.IndexOutOfBoundsException
> > at sun.nio.cs.StreamEncoder.write(StreamEncoder.java:132)
> > at java.io.OutputStreamWriter.write(OutputStreamWriter.java:191)
> > at
org.apache.tomcat.util.buf.WriteConvertor.write(C2BConverter.java:228
> > )
> > at
org.apache.tomcat.util.buf.C2BConverter.convert(C2BConverter.java:120
> > )
> > at
org.apache.coyote.tomcat5.OutputBuffer.realWriteChars(OutputBuffer.ja
> > va:606)
> > at
org.apache.tomcat.util.buf.CharChunk.flushBuffer(CharChunk.java:463)
> > at
org.apache.coyote.tomcat5.OutputBuffer.flush(OutputBuffer.java:357)
> > at
org.apache.coyote.tomcat5.CoyoteWriter.flush(CoyoteWriter.java:117)
> > at
org.apache.jasper.runtime.JspWriterImpl.flush(JspWriterImpl.java:203)
> > at
org.apache.jasper.runtime.JspRuntimeLibrary.include(JspRuntimeLibrary
> > .java:990)
> > ...
> >
> > In CharChunk,
> >
> > public void flushBuffer()
> > throws IOException
> > {
> > //assert out!=null
> > if( out==null ) {
> > throw new IOException( "Buffer overflow, no sink " + limit + " "
+
> > buff.length );
> > }
> > out.realWriteChars( buff, start, end - start );
> > end=start;
> > }
> >
> > when realWriteChars is called, the value for start is 0, end is 16384, and
> > buff.length is 8192, hence the exception.
> >
> > Does anyone knows how end can go beyond 8192? This only hapeens very
> > rarely, under heavy load.
>
> I don't know. I suppose limit is 8192 also. Are you sure your test is
> clean, and without anything weird ? (somehow, I doubt it)
> I've changed a bit the algorithm in ByteChunk, and it seems better, but
> the CharChunk algorithm is identical in 4.1's ByteChunk and CharChunk.
> We would have noticed anything bad, I think.
>
I don't know much about the test; it is one of stress test we have, but it
should not affect CharChunk this way, right, even if it has something
weird? Like I said, this happens only in this test, and not always
reproducible, so I am not surprised that nobody noticed it in 4.1. I
thought it might be thread related, but each thread should have its own
CharChunk instance, so I can't see how. I look into this more and report
back.
-Kin-man
> Remy
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
