[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-9393?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15171696#comment-15171696
]
Anoop Sam John commented on HBASE-9393:
---------------------------------------
bq.can useHBaseChecksum vary amongst instances in the same JVM? if it can, then
we shouldn't be sharing cached information about the unbuffer call at all (or
we need to have one of them per streamClass). That would solve the "assign to
static" business by moving to per-instance caches of the reflection information.
The static boolean tells whether the underlying FS supports unbuffer call or
not. Depending on the useHBaseChecksum and stream it wont change.. So there is
no confusion as such abt this.
Regarding the init of the static boolean, IMHO there is no need to worry abt
the multi thread. We dont want every op to do the interfaces listing and check
(String op). Even if, at begin, 2 threads do it parallely, its ok. Both will
give same result only. Pls add proper comments here. And no need to add extra
things to get away with findbugs warn. Write clearly why no worry abt findbugs
comment here and we can add ignore annotate for the findbugs so that it wont
list this comment.
> Hbase does not closing a closed socket resulting in many CLOSE_WAIT
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-9393
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-9393
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 0.94.2, 0.98.0
> Environment: Centos 6.4 - 7 regionservers/datanodes, 8 TB per node,
> 7279 regions
> Reporter: Avi Zrachya
> Assignee: Ashish Singhi
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 2.0.0
>
> Attachments: HBASE-9393.patch, HBASE-9393.v1.patch,
> HBASE-9393.v10.patch, HBASE-9393.v11.patch, HBASE-9393.v12.patch,
> HBASE-9393.v13.patch, HBASE-9393.v2.patch, HBASE-9393.v3.patch,
> HBASE-9393.v4.patch, HBASE-9393.v5.patch, HBASE-9393.v5.patch,
> HBASE-9393.v5.patch, HBASE-9393.v6.patch, HBASE-9393.v6.patch,
> HBASE-9393.v6.patch, HBASE-9393.v7.patch, HBASE-9393.v8.patch,
> HBASE-9393.v9.patch
>
>
> HBase dose not close a dead connection with the datanode.
> This resulting in over 60K CLOSE_WAIT and at some point HBase can not connect
> to the datanode because too many mapped sockets from one host to another on
> the same port.
> The example below is with low CLOSE_WAIT count because we had to restart
> hbase to solve the porblem, later in time it will incease to 60-100K sockets
> on CLOSE_WAIT
> [root@hd2-region3 ~]# netstat -nap |grep CLOSE_WAIT |grep 21592 |wc -l
> 13156
> [root@hd2-region3 ~]# ps -ef |grep 21592
> root 17255 17219 0 12:26 pts/0 00:00:00 grep 21592
> hbase 21592 1 17 Aug29 ? 03:29:06
> /usr/java/jdk1.6.0_26/bin/java -XX:OnOutOfMemoryError=kill -9 %p -Xmx8000m
> -ea -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC -XX:+CMSIncrementalMode
> -Dhbase.log.dir=/var/log/hbase
> -Dhbase.log.file=hbase-hbase-regionserver-hd2-region3.swnet.corp.log ...
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
