On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 03:39:39PM +0100, Volker Simonis wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Andreas Lundblad
> <andreas.lundb...@oracle.com> wrote:
> >> >> Interesting observation. The code for waiting for valid port file values
> >> >> basically looks like
> >> >>
> >> >> for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
> >> >> checkPortFile();
> >> >> if (successful)
> >> >> break;
> >> >> sleep(500);
> >> >> }
> >> >>
> >> >> so the fact that it even reaches 6676 ms looks suspicious when it comes
> >> >> to
> >> >> load.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Why? Under load those sleep(500)'s might not return for much longer; and
> >> > the
> >> > whole things might be time preempted at any point for an extended period
> >> > of
> >> > time.
> >
> > What I meant was that the fact that the code takes 6676 ms to complete
> > increases my suspicion about it being due to a load issue.
> >
> >
> >> What about putting another loop around this loop which prints a
> >> warning to stdout (e.g. "..trying to connect to sjavac server since X
> >> seconds") for another five or so times. We could also print the system
> >> load [1] although I'm not sure it's worth it. On our AIX machines it
> >> is often a network/NFS problem which causes long startup times of new
> >> executables and this won't be observable by looking at the system load
> >> (but it may at least give a hint').
> >>
> >> [1]
> >> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/lang/management/OperatingSystemMXBean.html#getSystemLoadAverage%28%29
> >
> > I don't think a loop around the loop is necessary. The actual code (which
> > is slightly different from the snippet I posted above) already prints a
> > message between each attempt.
> >
> > I was thinking of just bumping the timeout from 5 seconds to, say, 60
> > seconds. If it's a load issue, we should se something like "Port file
> > values found after 9000 ms", in which case we know for sure that it was a
> > premature timeout issue. If no port files materialize after >60 seconds, we
> > can probably safely assume that the issue is due to something else.
> >
>
> Sounds good. Let's try it.
Patch has now been pushed [1].
Please let me know if any of you still experience the "No portfile values
materialized" problem.
-- Andreas
[1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/3e4edb085bf0
