https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
Mark Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||huangzeling8...@dingtalk.co
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
Remy Maucherat changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
Venkat changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|1 |0
Status|RESOLVED
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
Mark Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
--- Comment #14 from Arshiya ---
Thanks a ton Remy!
Any update on the tentative release date of 9.0.40 please .
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
--- Comment #13 from Remy Maucherat ---
A previous refactoring of the Poller.events() could cause this uncaught
exception to occur. This is fixed in 10.0.0-M10 and 9.0.40 where the NPE will
be logged properly and Tomcat should be able to
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
--- Comment #12 from Remy Maucherat ---
I made a mistake, I was not looking at the right call to events(). So this
should be tightened up [although I don't see how it can end up in this
situation].
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
--- Comment #11 from Arshiya ---
Thank you for the swift response Remy.
For a few hours the application accepts requests and processes fine , but
suddenly after this exception is logged , none of the requests are accepted
(tps drops to 0) .
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
--- Comment #10 from Remy Maucherat ---
Ok, so this NPE will be caught and logged with no major consequences. There is
normally no way it could happen, however (the SocketChannel of the NioChannel
is null, which only happens for the closed
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
Arshiya changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEEDINFO|NEW
--- Comment #9 from Arshiya ---
Please
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
Remy Maucherat changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |NEEDINFO
--- Comment #8 from Remy
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 5:56 PM wrote:
> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
>
> Arshiya changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
>
> Status|NEEDINFO
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
Arshiya changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEEDINFO|NEW
--- Comment #7 from Arshiya ---
The
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
--- Comment #6 from Mark Thomas ---
+1 to adding that JVM option and then review tge full stack trace as the next
step.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
Remy Maucherat changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |NEEDINFO
--- Comment #5 from Remy
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
--- Comment #4 from Mark Thomas ---
Without the stack trace there isn't much we can do. The most that looks
possible at this stage is to add some additional try/catch blocks with logging
of exceptions.
It would be helpful to see the
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
Arshiya changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEEDINFO|NEW
--- Comment #3 from Arshiya ---
This
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
Mark Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |NEEDINFO
Severity|blocker
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
--- Comment #1 from Remy Maucherat ---
Can you provide the full stack trace of the exception ?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
-
To
19 matches
Mail list logo
