[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6510?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13935208#comment-13935208
]
Brett Bergquist commented on DERBY-6510:
----------------------------------------
The statement cache could be full and statements could be invalidated. There
are unique queries that are being generated that even though are using a
prepared statement will be different and added to the cache. So I could it
possible that this statement being executed might have been tossed out of the
cache.
How does the statement cache decide which statement to toss when it is full?
Does it consider that a statement might have been recently re-used? If so,
then this would indicate that this would not be a statement that would be
tossed...
> Deby engine threads not making progress
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-6510
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6510
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Network Server
> Affects Versions: 10.9.1.0
> Environment: Oracle Solaris 10/9, Oracle M5000 32 CPU, 128GB memory,
> 8GB allocated to Derby Network Server
> Reporter: Brett Bergquist
> Priority: Critical
> Attachments: dbstate.log, derbystacktrace.txt
>
>
> We had an issue today in a production environment at a large customer site.
> Basically 5 database interactions became stuck and are not progressing.
> Part of the system dump performs a stack trace every few seconds for a period
> of a minute on the Glassfish application server and the Derby database engine
> (running in network server mode). Also, the dump captures the current
> transactions and the current lock table (ie. syscs_diag.transactions and
> syscs_diag.lock_table). We had to restart the system and in doing so, the
> Derby database engine would not shutdown and had to be killed.
> The stack traces of the Derby engine show 5 threads that are basically making
> no progress in that at each sample, they are at the same point, waiting.
> I will attach the stack traces as well as the state of the transactions and
> locks.
> Interesting is that the "derby.jdbc.xaTransactionTimeout =1800" is set, yet
> the transactions did not timeout. The timeout is for 30 minutes but the
> transactions were in process for hours.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
