[JBoss JIRA] (JGRP-1675) Threads stuck in FlowControl.decrementIfEnoughCredits
by Radim Vansa (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1675?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Radim Vansa edited comment on JGRP-1675 at 11/6/13 3:26 AM:
------------------------------------------------------------
I'd prefer JGroups to be always working rather than working with probability dependent on INT:OOB threadpool ratio/messages frequency/dark magic. INT TP has much lower value if regular messages which are non-blocking from application perspective may get the thread stuck -> lead to threadpool depletion. I agree with Dan that listing messages according to flags would make the system more reliable.
[~belaban]: -Could you specify what's the fix (as this is fixed in 3.5)? Marking the FlowControl messages ad DONT_BUNDLE, telling ISPN developers to fix GET_FIRST flooding or something else? Does the comment about the two tests passing mean "passing as long as these send the get with GET_ALL" (the number of targets doesn't matter)?-
OK, I've found in another mail that it is marking the credit request as INT | OOB, but it should be mentioned more clearly somewhere in the JIRA.
was (Author: rvansa):
I'd prefer JGroups to be always working rather than working with probability dependent on INT:OOB threadpool ratio/messages frequency/dark magic. INT TP has much lower value if regular messages which are non-blocking from application perspective may get the thread stuck -> lead to threadpool depletion. I agree with Dan that listing messages according to flags would make the system more reliable.
[~belaban]: Could you specify what's the fix (as this is fixed in 3.5)? Marking the FlowControl messages ad DONT_BUNDLE, telling ISPN developers to fix GET_FIRST flooding or something else? Does the comment about the two tests passing mean "passing as long as these send the get with GET_ALL" (the number of targets doesn't matter)?
> Threads stuck in FlowControl.decrementIfEnoughCredits
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JGRP-1675
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1675
> Project: JGroups
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 3.4
> Reporter: Radim Vansa
> Assignee: Bela Ban
> Fix For: 3.5
>
> Attachments: jgroups-udp-radim.xml, RemoteGetStressTest.java, UPerf2.java
>
>
> I have recently observed a repeated situation where many (or all) threads have been stuck waiting for credits in FlowControl protocol.
> The credit request was not handled on the other node as this is non-oob message and some (actually many of them - cause unknown) messages before the request have been lost - therefore the request was waiting for them to be re-sent.
> However, these have not been re-sent properly as the retransmission request was not received - all OOB threads were stuck in the FlowControl protocol as these handled some other request and tried to send a response - but the response could not be sent until FlowControl gets the credits.
> The probability of such situation could be lowered by tagging the credit request to be OOB - then it would be handled immediately. If the credit replenish message would then be processed in regular OOB pool, this could get already depleted by many requests, but setting up the internal thread pool would solve the problem.
> Other consideration would be to allow releasing thread from FlowControl (let it send the message even without credits) if it waits there for too long.
> h3. Workaround
> It appears that setting MFC and UFC max_credits to 10M or removing these protocols at all is a workaround for this issue.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
12 years, 6 months
[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-320) Drools plugin Rete Tree viewer does not work with timer and || operator.
by RH Bugzilla Integration (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/DROOLS-320?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin... ]
RH Bugzilla Integration updated DROOLS-320:
-------------------------------------------
Bugzilla References: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1027118, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1027120 (was: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1027118)
> Drools plugin Rete Tree viewer does not work with timer and || operator.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DROOLS-320
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/DROOLS-320
> Project: Drools
> Issue Type: Bug
> Security Level: Public(Everyone can see)
> Affects Versions: 6.0.0.CR5
> Environment: Mac OS-X 10.9, JBoss Developer Studio 7, Oracle Hotspot 1.7.0_45, Drools-jBPM Eclipse plugin 6.0.0.CR5
> Reporter: Duncan Doyle
> Assignee: Mark Proctor
> Labels: drools, eclipse, plugin, rete, tree, view
>
> See this example project: https://github.com/DuncanDoyle/DroolsReteViewer , which is based on the Drools Eclipse sample project.
> The 'src/main/resources/rules/Sample.drl' is a valid DRL file, but it cannot be opened in the Rete Tree because of:
> - the 'timer (int: 10s)' definition in rule "GoodBye-Timer". This gives the error:
> Rete Tree Build Error!
> Reason:
> org.drools.core.RuntimeDroolsException:
> java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException: [Rete(0)]
> - the '||' operator in the rule "Hello World-Or". This gives the error:
> Rete Tree Build Error!
> Reason:
> java.lang.NullPointerException: null
> This forces us to change our rule definition files to be able to inspect the Rete Tree (which we require to analyse the tree for possible optimizations).
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
12 years, 6 months
[JBoss JIRA] (JGRP-1675) Threads stuck in FlowControl.decrementIfEnoughCredits
by Radim Vansa (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1675?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Radim Vansa commented on JGRP-1675:
-----------------------------------
I'd prefer JGroups to be always working rather than working with probability dependent on INT:OOB threadpool ratio/messages frequency/dark magic. INT TP has much lower value if regular messages which are non-blocking from application perspective may get the thread stuck -> lead to threadpool depletion. I agree with dan that listing messages according.
[~belaban]: Could you specify what's the fix (as this is fixed in 3.5)? Marking the FlowControl messages ad DONT_BUNDLE, telling ISPN developers to fix GET_FIRST flooding or something else? Does the comment about the two tests passing mean "passing as long as these send the get with GET_ALL" (the number of targets doesn't matter)?
> Threads stuck in FlowControl.decrementIfEnoughCredits
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JGRP-1675
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1675
> Project: JGroups
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 3.4
> Reporter: Radim Vansa
> Assignee: Bela Ban
> Fix For: 3.5
>
> Attachments: jgroups-udp-radim.xml, RemoteGetStressTest.java, UPerf2.java
>
>
> I have recently observed a repeated situation where many (or all) threads have been stuck waiting for credits in FlowControl protocol.
> The credit request was not handled on the other node as this is non-oob message and some (actually many of them - cause unknown) messages before the request have been lost - therefore the request was waiting for them to be re-sent.
> However, these have not been re-sent properly as the retransmission request was not received - all OOB threads were stuck in the FlowControl protocol as these handled some other request and tried to send a response - but the response could not be sent until FlowControl gets the credits.
> The probability of such situation could be lowered by tagging the credit request to be OOB - then it would be handled immediately. If the credit replenish message would then be processed in regular OOB pool, this could get already depleted by many requests, but setting up the internal thread pool would solve the problem.
> Other consideration would be to allow releasing thread from FlowControl (let it send the message even without credits) if it waits there for too long.
> h3. Workaround
> It appears that setting MFC and UFC max_credits to 10M or removing these protocols at all is a workaround for this issue.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
12 years, 6 months
[JBoss JIRA] (JGRP-1675) Threads stuck in FlowControl.decrementIfEnoughCredits
by Radim Vansa (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1675?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Radim Vansa edited comment on JGRP-1675 at 11/6/13 3:16 AM:
------------------------------------------------------------
I'd prefer JGroups to be always working rather than working with probability dependent on INT:OOB threadpool ratio/messages frequency/dark magic. INT TP has much lower value if regular messages which are non-blocking from application perspective may get the thread stuck -> lead to threadpool depletion. I agree with Dan that listing messages according to flags would make the system more reliable.
[~belaban]: Could you specify what's the fix (as this is fixed in 3.5)? Marking the FlowControl messages ad DONT_BUNDLE, telling ISPN developers to fix GET_FIRST flooding or something else? Does the comment about the two tests passing mean "passing as long as these send the get with GET_ALL" (the number of targets doesn't matter)?
was (Author: rvansa):
I'd prefer JGroups to be always working rather than working with probability dependent on INT:OOB threadpool ratio/messages frequency/dark magic. INT TP has much lower value if regular messages which are non-blocking from application perspective may get the thread stuck -> lead to threadpool depletion. I agree with dan that listing messages according.
[~belaban]: Could you specify what's the fix (as this is fixed in 3.5)? Marking the FlowControl messages ad DONT_BUNDLE, telling ISPN developers to fix GET_FIRST flooding or something else? Does the comment about the two tests passing mean "passing as long as these send the get with GET_ALL" (the number of targets doesn't matter)?
> Threads stuck in FlowControl.decrementIfEnoughCredits
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JGRP-1675
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1675
> Project: JGroups
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 3.4
> Reporter: Radim Vansa
> Assignee: Bela Ban
> Fix For: 3.5
>
> Attachments: jgroups-udp-radim.xml, RemoteGetStressTest.java, UPerf2.java
>
>
> I have recently observed a repeated situation where many (or all) threads have been stuck waiting for credits in FlowControl protocol.
> The credit request was not handled on the other node as this is non-oob message and some (actually many of them - cause unknown) messages before the request have been lost - therefore the request was waiting for them to be re-sent.
> However, these have not been re-sent properly as the retransmission request was not received - all OOB threads were stuck in the FlowControl protocol as these handled some other request and tried to send a response - but the response could not be sent until FlowControl gets the credits.
> The probability of such situation could be lowered by tagging the credit request to be OOB - then it would be handled immediately. If the credit replenish message would then be processed in regular OOB pool, this could get already depleted by many requests, but setting up the internal thread pool would solve the problem.
> Other consideration would be to allow releasing thread from FlowControl (let it send the message even without credits) if it waits there for too long.
> h3. Workaround
> It appears that setting MFC and UFC max_credits to 10M or removing these protocols at all is a workaround for this issue.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
12 years, 6 months
[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-320) Drools plugin Rete Tree viewer does not work with timer and || operator.
by RH Bugzilla Integration (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/DROOLS-320?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin... ]
RH Bugzilla Integration updated DROOLS-320:
-------------------------------------------
Bugzilla Update: Perform
Bugzilla References: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1027118
> Drools plugin Rete Tree viewer does not work with timer and || operator.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DROOLS-320
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/DROOLS-320
> Project: Drools
> Issue Type: Bug
> Security Level: Public(Everyone can see)
> Affects Versions: 6.0.0.CR5
> Environment: Mac OS-X 10.9, JBoss Developer Studio 7, Oracle Hotspot 1.7.0_45, Drools-jBPM Eclipse plugin 6.0.0.CR5
> Reporter: Duncan Doyle
> Assignee: Mark Proctor
> Labels: drools, eclipse, plugin, rete, tree, view
>
> See this example project: https://github.com/DuncanDoyle/DroolsReteViewer , which is based on the Drools Eclipse sample project.
> The 'src/main/resources/rules/Sample.drl' is a valid DRL file, but it cannot be opened in the Rete Tree because of:
> - the 'timer (int: 10s)' definition in rule "GoodBye-Timer". This gives the error:
> Rete Tree Build Error!
> Reason:
> org.drools.core.RuntimeDroolsException:
> java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException: [Rete(0)]
> - the '||' operator in the rule "Hello World-Or". This gives the error:
> Rete Tree Build Error!
> Reason:
> java.lang.NullPointerException: null
> This forces us to change our rule definition files to be able to inspect the Rete Tree (which we require to analyse the tree for possible optimizations).
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
12 years, 6 months
[JBoss JIRA] (JGRP-1675) Threads stuck in FlowControl.decrementIfEnoughCredits
by Bela Ban (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1675?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Bela Ban commented on JGRP-1675:
--------------------------------
[~dan.berindei] Yes, it is possible that an INT or OOB thread will process messages with different flags in UNICAST or NAKACK. This is as designed, and the probability of this happening is proportional to the thread pool sizes and the types of messages received. So if we have a large OOB pool and receive a lot of OOB messages and only a few regular messages, then chances are that the regular messages will be batched together with the OOB messages in UNICAST or NAKACK and will get passed up to the application via an OOB thread.
> Threads stuck in FlowControl.decrementIfEnoughCredits
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JGRP-1675
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1675
> Project: JGroups
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 3.4
> Reporter: Radim Vansa
> Assignee: Bela Ban
> Fix For: 3.5
>
> Attachments: jgroups-udp-radim.xml, RemoteGetStressTest.java, UPerf2.java
>
>
> I have recently observed a repeated situation where many (or all) threads have been stuck waiting for credits in FlowControl protocol.
> The credit request was not handled on the other node as this is non-oob message and some (actually many of them - cause unknown) messages before the request have been lost - therefore the request was waiting for them to be re-sent.
> However, these have not been re-sent properly as the retransmission request was not received - all OOB threads were stuck in the FlowControl protocol as these handled some other request and tried to send a response - but the response could not be sent until FlowControl gets the credits.
> The probability of such situation could be lowered by tagging the credit request to be OOB - then it would be handled immediately. If the credit replenish message would then be processed in regular OOB pool, this could get already depleted by many requests, but setting up the internal thread pool would solve the problem.
> Other consideration would be to allow releasing thread from FlowControl (let it send the message even without credits) if it waits there for too long.
> h3. Workaround
> It appears that setting MFC and UFC max_credits to 10M or removing these protocols at all is a workaround for this issue.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
12 years, 6 months
[JBoss JIRA] (JGRP-1675) Threads stuck in FlowControl.decrementIfEnoughCredits
by Bela Ban (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1675?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Bela Ban updated JGRP-1675:
---------------------------
Fix Version/s: (was: 3.4.1)
Internal pool doesn't exist in 3.2, fix is only applicable to 3.5
> Threads stuck in FlowControl.decrementIfEnoughCredits
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JGRP-1675
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1675
> Project: JGroups
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 3.4
> Reporter: Radim Vansa
> Assignee: Bela Ban
> Fix For: 3.5
>
> Attachments: jgroups-udp-radim.xml, RemoteGetStressTest.java, UPerf2.java
>
>
> I have recently observed a repeated situation where many (or all) threads have been stuck waiting for credits in FlowControl protocol.
> The credit request was not handled on the other node as this is non-oob message and some (actually many of them - cause unknown) messages before the request have been lost - therefore the request was waiting for them to be re-sent.
> However, these have not been re-sent properly as the retransmission request was not received - all OOB threads were stuck in the FlowControl protocol as these handled some other request and tried to send a response - but the response could not be sent until FlowControl gets the credits.
> The probability of such situation could be lowered by tagging the credit request to be OOB - then it would be handled immediately. If the credit replenish message would then be processed in regular OOB pool, this could get already depleted by many requests, but setting up the internal thread pool would solve the problem.
> Other consideration would be to allow releasing thread from FlowControl (let it send the message even without credits) if it waits there for too long.
> h3. Workaround
> It appears that setting MFC and UFC max_credits to 10M or removing these protocols at all is a workaround for this issue.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
12 years, 6 months
[JBoss JIRA] (JBREM-1307) TimedOutputStream OutputTimerTask call to close on SSL OutputStream blocks
by Ron Sigal (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBREM-1307?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin... ]
Ron Sigal closed JBREM-1307.
----------------------------
> TimedOutputStream OutputTimerTask call to close on SSL OutputStream blocks
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JBREM-1307
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBREM-1307
> Project: JBoss Remoting
> Issue Type: Bug
> Security Level: Public(Everyone can see)
> Components: transport
> Affects Versions: 2.2.3.SP2, 2.5.4.SP4
> Environment: JBoss EAP 4.3.0 CP08 and CP10
> Reporter: Doug Grove
> Assignee: Ron Sigal
> Labels: messaging
> Fix For: 2.5.4.SP5
>
> Attachments: jboss-remoting-src.jar, jboss-remoting.jar
>
>
> In order to provide a mechanism for timing out a network/socket write operation, the org.jboss.remoting.transport.socket.TimedOutputStream class starts a timer. If the duration of the write operation exceeds the timer interval, then the timer will call close() on the output stream. This interrupts the output stream write() operation and causes the write operation to throw an IOException.
> When the output stream uses secure sockets (SSL), however, the call to close() on the output stream can block indefinitely. The threads associated with the write() and close() operation will only clear when the tcp keepalive timeout mechanism in the operation system is invoked.
> This appears to be related to a know bug in the java runtime: http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=6358629
> Specifically, in a thread dump you will see:
> "Timer-9" daemon prio=10 tid=0x5016c400 nid=0x2638 waiting on condition [0x4cbad000]
> java.lang.Thread.State: WAITING (parking)
> at sun.misc.Unsafe.park(Native Method)
> - parking to wait for <0x585021a0> (a java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantLock$NonfairSync)
> at java.util.concurrent.locks.LockSupport.park(LockSupport.java:158)
> at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.parkAndCheckInterrupt(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:747)
> at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.acquireQueued(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:778)
> at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.acquire(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:1114)
> at java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantLock$NonfairSync.lock(ReentrantLock.java:186)
> at java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantLock.lock(ReentrantLock.java:262)
> at com.sun.net.ssl.internal.ssl.SSLSocketImpl.writeRecord(SSLSocketImpl.java:720)
> at com.sun.net.ssl.internal.ssl.SSLSocketImpl.sendAlert(SSLSocketImpl.java:1720)
> at com.sun.net.ssl.internal.ssl.SSLSocketImpl.warning(SSLSocketImpl.java:1564)
> at com.sun.net.ssl.internal.ssl.SSLSocketImpl.closeInternal(SSLSocketImpl.java:1362)
> - locked <0x58502030> (a com.sun.net.ssl.internal.ssl.SSLSocketImpl)
> at com.sun.net.ssl.internal.ssl.SSLSocketImpl.close(SSLSocketImpl.java:1301)
> at com.sun.net.ssl.internal.ssl.AppOutputStream.close(AppOutputStream.java:80)
> at org.jboss.remoting.transport.socket.TimedOutputStream.close(TimedOutputStream.java:57)
> at org.jboss.remoting.transport.socket.TimedOutputStream$OutputTimerTask.run(TimedOutputStream.java:145)
> at java.util.TimerThread.mainLoop(Timer.java:512)
> at java.util.TimerThread.run(Timer.java:462)
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
12 years, 6 months
[JBoss JIRA] (JBREM-1307) TimedOutputStream OutputTimerTask call to close on SSL OutputStream blocks
by Ron Sigal (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBREM-1307?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin... ]
Ron Sigal updated JBREM-1307:
-----------------------------
Fix Version/s: 2.5.4.SP5
Affects Version/s: 2.5.4.SP4
> TimedOutputStream OutputTimerTask call to close on SSL OutputStream blocks
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JBREM-1307
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBREM-1307
> Project: JBoss Remoting
> Issue Type: Bug
> Security Level: Public(Everyone can see)
> Components: transport
> Affects Versions: 2.2.3.SP2, 2.5.4.SP4
> Environment: JBoss EAP 4.3.0 CP08 and CP10
> Reporter: Doug Grove
> Assignee: Ron Sigal
> Labels: messaging
> Fix For: 2.5.4.SP5
>
> Attachments: jboss-remoting-src.jar, jboss-remoting.jar
>
>
> In order to provide a mechanism for timing out a network/socket write operation, the org.jboss.remoting.transport.socket.TimedOutputStream class starts a timer. If the duration of the write operation exceeds the timer interval, then the timer will call close() on the output stream. This interrupts the output stream write() operation and causes the write operation to throw an IOException.
> When the output stream uses secure sockets (SSL), however, the call to close() on the output stream can block indefinitely. The threads associated with the write() and close() operation will only clear when the tcp keepalive timeout mechanism in the operation system is invoked.
> This appears to be related to a know bug in the java runtime: http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=6358629
> Specifically, in a thread dump you will see:
> "Timer-9" daemon prio=10 tid=0x5016c400 nid=0x2638 waiting on condition [0x4cbad000]
> java.lang.Thread.State: WAITING (parking)
> at sun.misc.Unsafe.park(Native Method)
> - parking to wait for <0x585021a0> (a java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantLock$NonfairSync)
> at java.util.concurrent.locks.LockSupport.park(LockSupport.java:158)
> at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.parkAndCheckInterrupt(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:747)
> at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.acquireQueued(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:778)
> at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.acquire(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:1114)
> at java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantLock$NonfairSync.lock(ReentrantLock.java:186)
> at java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantLock.lock(ReentrantLock.java:262)
> at com.sun.net.ssl.internal.ssl.SSLSocketImpl.writeRecord(SSLSocketImpl.java:720)
> at com.sun.net.ssl.internal.ssl.SSLSocketImpl.sendAlert(SSLSocketImpl.java:1720)
> at com.sun.net.ssl.internal.ssl.SSLSocketImpl.warning(SSLSocketImpl.java:1564)
> at com.sun.net.ssl.internal.ssl.SSLSocketImpl.closeInternal(SSLSocketImpl.java:1362)
> - locked <0x58502030> (a com.sun.net.ssl.internal.ssl.SSLSocketImpl)
> at com.sun.net.ssl.internal.ssl.SSLSocketImpl.close(SSLSocketImpl.java:1301)
> at com.sun.net.ssl.internal.ssl.AppOutputStream.close(AppOutputStream.java:80)
> at org.jboss.remoting.transport.socket.TimedOutputStream.close(TimedOutputStream.java:57)
> at org.jboss.remoting.transport.socket.TimedOutputStream$OutputTimerTask.run(TimedOutputStream.java:145)
> at java.util.TimerThread.mainLoop(Timer.java:512)
> at java.util.TimerThread.run(Timer.java:462)
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
12 years, 6 months