From: André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com]
public void close()
throws SomeException
{
putEndRequest();
flush();
socket = null;
}
flush() being another function which reads the socket until there's
nothing left to read, and throws away
From: André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com]
Subject: Re: CLOSE_WAIT and what to do about it
If these sockets disappear during a GC, then it must mean that they are
still being referenced by some abandoned objects sitting on the Heap,
which have not yet been reclaimed by the GC.
Which
Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com]
Subject: Re: CLOSE_WAIT and what to do about it
Relatedly, does there exist any way to force a given
JVM process to do a full GC interactively, but from a
Linux command-line ?
Found a command line tool that will do
Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com]
Subject: Re: CLOSE_WAIT and what to do about it
If these sockets disappear during a GC, then it must mean that they are
still being referenced by some abandoned objects sitting on the Heap,
which have not yet been
From: André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com]
Subject: Re: CLOSE_WAIT and what to do about it
Looking at that code above, it is obvious that socket is open, until
it is set to null, without previously doing a socket.close().
I don't know Java enough to know if this alone could cause
Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com]
Subject: Re: CLOSE_WAIT and what to do about it
Looking at that code above, it is obvious that socket is open, until
it is set to null, without previously doing a socket.close().
I don't know Java enough to know
From: André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com]
Subject: Re: CLOSE_WAIT and what to do about it
Relatedly, does there exist any way to force a given
JVM process to do a full GC interactively, but from a
Linux command-line ?
Found a command line tool that will do what you want:
http
Skimmed quickly through your post there while working, so forgive me if
this is irrelevant.
CLOSE_WAIT is a state where the connection has been closed on the tcp/ip
level, but the application (in this case java) has not closed the socket
descriptor yet.
As a coincidence we just fixed this very
Hi.
As a follow-upon another thread originally entitled apache/tomcat
communication issues (502 response), I'd like to pursue the CLOSE-WAIT
subject.
Sorry if this post is a bit long, I want to make sure that I do provide
all the necessary information.
Like the original poster, I am seeing
From: André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com]
It has been previously established that a socket in a
long-time-lingering CLOSE-WAIT status, is due to one or the other side
of a TCP connection not properly closing its side of the
connection when
it is done with it.
I also surmise (without
Peter Crowther wrote:
[...]
Does that help? Or is it clear as mud?
For no-java-expert-me, it is indeed of the hazy category.
But it helps a lot, in the sense of adding a +3 in the column get
back to the vendor and ask them to fix their code.
;-)
Thanks.
Peter Crowther wrote:
[...]
If you have some way of forcing that Java process to collect garbage, you
should do so. It's possible for sockets that haven't been close()d to hang
around, unreferenced but not yet garbage collected. A full GC would collect
any of these, finalizing them as it
From: André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com]
This process is started as a daemon, with a java command-line.
Is it possible to add some arguments to that command-line to induce
the JVM to do a GC more often ?
http://java.sun.com/javase/technologies/hotspot/gc/gc_tuning_6.html - I don't
think
From: André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com]
Subject: Re: CLOSE_WAIT and what to do about it
Relatedly, does there exist any way to force a given JVM process to do
a full GC interactively, but from a Linux command-line ?
I haven't found one yet, but there are numerous command-line
Hi André,
I didn't fully read all responses, so I hope i don't repeat to much (or
worse contradict statements contained in other replies).
On 08.04.2009 12:32, André Warnier wrote:
Like the original poster, I am seeing on my systems a fair number of
sockets apparently stuck for a long time in
15 matches
Mail list logo
