Bugs item #808170, was opened at 2003-09-17 23:19
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by gabramovic
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=376685&aid=808170&group_id=22866
Category: Clustering
Group: v3.2
Status: Closed
Resolution: Fixed
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Adrian Brock (ejort)
Assigned to: Bela Ban (belaban)
Summary: Partition problems 3.2.2RC4
Initial Comment:
JBoss-3.2.2RC4 (current CVS)
Java1.4.2
Redhat 9
I'm seeing problems with nodes in a partition discovering
each other.
Sometimes it works,
Sometimes is doesn't (see attached console.log and
console2.log)
I have cluster logs as well if you need them.
Shutdown blocks on the partition when it fails
(see threaddumps at end of logs)
Sometimes I get a NullPointerException
03-09-17 19:07:32,545 DEBUG
[org.jboss.ha.framework.interfaces.HAPartition.Def
aultPartition] Get current members
2003-09-17 19:07:32,546 INFO
[org.jboss.ha.framework.interfaces.HAPartition.Def
aultPartition] Number of cluster members: 2
2003-09-17 19:07:32,556 INFO
[org.jboss.ha.framework.interfaces.HAPartition.Def
aultPartition] Other members: 1
2003-09-17 19:07:32,566 WARN
[org.jboss.ha.framework.interfaces.HAPartition.Def
aultPartition] No additional information has been found
in the JavaGroup
address
: make sure you are running with a correct version of
JavaGroups and
that the pr
otocol you are using supports the 'additionalData'
behaviour
2003-09-17 19:07:32,577 ERROR
[org.jboss.ha.framework.server.ClusterPartition] S
tarting failed
java.lang.NullPointerException
at
org.jboss.ha.framework.server.HAPartitionImpl.verifyNodeIsUnique(HAPa
rtitionImpl.java:763)
at
org.jboss.ha.framework.server.HAPartitionImpl.startPartition(HAPartit
ionImpl.java:236)
at
org.jboss.ha.framework.server.ClusterPartition.startService(ClusterPa
rtition.java:293)
at
org.jboss.system.ServiceMBeanSupport.start(ServiceMBeanSupport.java:1
92)
at
sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor5.invoke(Unknown Source)
at
sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAcces
Regards,
Adrian
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Goran Abramovic (gabramovic)
Date: 2003-12-29 10:47
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=938829
The stack trace looks exactly like the one that Adrian posted
when he opened the bug report.
23:43:56,528 INFO [ClusterPartition] Starting channel
23:43:56,529 INFO [DefaultPartition] Number of cluster
members: 2
23:43:56,529 INFO [DefaultPartition] Other members: 1
23:43:56,530 WARN [DefaultPartition] No additional
information has been found in the JavaGroup address: make
sure you are running with a correct version of JGroups and
that the protocol you are using supports the 'additionalData'
behaviour
23:43:56,535 ERROR [ClusterPartition] Starting failed
java.lang.NullPointerException
at
org.jboss.ha.framework.server.HAPartitionImpl.verifyNodeIsUni
que(HAPartitionImpl.java:763)
at
org.jboss.ha.framework.server.HAPartitionImpl.startPartition
(HAPartitionImpl.java:236)
at
org.jboss.ha.framework.server.ClusterPartition.startService
(ClusterPartition.java:294)
at org.jboss.system.ServiceMBeanSupport.start
(ServiceMBeanSupport.java:192)
I would post the log but don't know how to attach a file :-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Sacha Labourey (slaboure)
Date: 2003-12-29 08:43
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=95900
To take another look, we need at least a log file.
Stacktrace/dump would be great.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Goran Abramovic (gabramovic)
Date: 2003-12-28 13:35
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=938829
I have noticed this problem occuring on JBoss 3.2.3.
I am using JBoss [WonderLand] 3.2.3 (build:
CVSTag=JBoss_3_2_3 date=200311301445) ; Java HotSpot
(TM) Server VM 1.4.2_01-b06,Sun Microsystems Inc. on OS-
System: Linux 2.4.20-20.9bigmem,i386
Using default configuration of clustering.
Can we have another look at this issue?
Regards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Sacha Labourey (slaboure)
Date: 2003-10-10 20:21
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=95900
New JGroups release added to both Branch_3_2 and HEAD.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Sacha Labourey (slaboure)
Date: 2003-10-07 12:38
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=95900
Bela, do you have a more definitive fix, or do we have to
implement the flush trick, update the jar and close the bug?
Is JG stable now for a JB release/tag?
Cheers,
sacha
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Adrian Brock (ejort)
Date: 2003-09-25 16:45
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=9459
Works for me.
Can we have a tagged version so I can check it out and include
it in jboss.
Regards,
Adrian
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Adrian Brock (ejort)
Date: 2003-09-25 02:20
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=9459
Hi Bela,
I only have pserver access to JGroups cvs (about 24 hours
behind).
Could you or Sacha update the jar in jboss's thirdparty?
Regards,
Adrian
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Bela Ban (belaban)
Date: 2003-09-25 01:31
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=34890
Okay, new fix in JGroups (try out
org.jgroups.tests.AddDataTest):
JChannel c=new JChannel();
c.down(new Event(Event.CONFIG));
c.getProtocolStack().flushEvents(); // <-- new
c.connect();
Not nice, but it works...
Bela
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Adrian Brock (ejort)
Date: 2003-09-23 21:14
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=9459
Looks like the problem is the config event is temporarily not
in any queues so waiting for the queues to become empty does
not work.
Thread[DownHandler (STABLE),5,main] Remove internal Queue
(1) messages Event[type=CONFIG,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thread[DownHandler (STABLE),5,main] removeInternal waiting
for remove_mutex
Thread[DownHandler (STABLE),5,main] removeInternal got
remove_mutex
Thread[DownHandler (STABLE),5,main] removeInternal releasing
remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty releasing remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] flushed down queue Queue (0) messages
Thread[main,5,main] flushing down queue Queue (0) messages
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty waiting for remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty got remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty releasing remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] flushed down queue Queue (0) messages
Thread[main,5,main] flushing down queue Queue (0) messages
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty waiting for remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty got remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty releasing remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] flushed down queue Queue (0) messages
Thread[main,5,main] flushing down queue Queue (0) messages
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty waiting for remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty got remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty releasing remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] flushed down queue Queue (0) messages
Thread[main,5,main] flushing down queue Queue (0) messages
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty waiting for remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty got remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty releasing remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] flushed down queue Queue (0) messages
Thread[main,5,main] flushing down queue Queue (0) messages
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty waiting for remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty got remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty releasing remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] flushed down queue Queue (0) messages
Thread[main,5,main] flushing down queue Queue (0) messages
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty waiting for remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty got remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] waitUnitEmpty releasing remove_mutex
Thread[main,5,main] flushed down queue Queue (0) messages
Thread[main,5,main] Checking for additional data
Thread[DownHandler (STABLE),5,main] Removed Queue (0)
messages Event[type=CONFIG, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thread[DownHandler (STABLE),5,main] adding Queue (0)
messages Event[type=CONFIG, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thread[DownHandler (STABLE),5,main] add waiting for mutext
Queue (0) messages Event[type=CONFIG,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thread[DownHandler (STABLE),5,main] notifying addition Queue
(1) messages Event[type=CONFIG,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thread[DownHandler (STABLE),5,main] notified addition Queue
(1) messages Event[type=CONFIG,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thread[DownHandler (STABLE),5,main] remove() waiting for
mutext Queue (0) messages
Thread[DownHandler (NAKACK),5,main] Remove internal Queue
(1) messages Event[type=CONFIG,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thread[DownHandler (NAKACK),5,main] removeInternal waiting
for remove_mutex
Thread[DownHandler (NAKACK),5,main] removeInternal got
remove_mutex
Thread[DownHandler (NAKACK),5,main] removeInternal releasing
remove_mutex
Thread[DownHandler (NAKACK),5,main] Removed Queue (0)
messages Event[type=CONFIG, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Regards,
Adrian
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Adrian Brock (ejort)
Date: 2003-09-23 20:04
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=9459
Correction is does reach UDP.
Regards,
Adrian
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Adrian Brock (ejort)
Date: 2003-09-23 19:59
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=9459
I've librarly added System.out.printlns to the jgroups source.
Attaced is test.txt from a run where one works and the other
does not.
I don't see the Config event reaching UDP when it fails,
it doesn't invoke setAdditionalData.
Regards,
Adrian
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Adrian Brock (ejort)
Date: 2003-09-23 18:50
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=9459
Yes, you have to make the same change to AddDataTest.java
Regards,
Adrian
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Sacha Labourey (slaboure)
Date: 2003-09-23 18:46
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=95900
Hello Adrian,
What do you mean by "You have to swap the pbcast
elements "? To make jboss start I had to swap STABLE and
NAKACK otherwise I get an ordering exception from JG.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Adrian Brock (ejort)
Date: 2003-09-23 18:42
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=9459
Sacha has upgraded to jgroups but I'm still seeing the problem.
Tested with JBoss but also see the problem with the attached
test.
You have to swap the pbcast elements in the attached test
to make it run.
Did Sacha get the correct version?
Do you need anything from me to debug it?
Regards,
Adrian
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Bela Ban (belaban)
Date: 2003-09-23 02:46
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=34890
I fixed this in JGroups CVS head. I can backport it to any
JavaGroups version if you want me to.
Otherwise, the change is in ProtocolStack.start() and Queue.
Sacha, Adrian ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Bela Ban (belaban)
Date: 2003-09-22 20:25
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=34890
I know what the problem is, working on a solution.
A simple quick fix is to add a timeout (say 500ms) after
sending down the CONFIG event, and before connecting.
Bela
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Adrian Brock (ejort)
Date: 2003-09-22 15:31
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=9459
It is definitly a race condition.
I add some System.out.printlns to the javagroups source
(the jboss tagged version).
I even got it to fail with the default configuration
<DefaultConfiguration>
checking for additional data Thread[main,5,main]
handling config event [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thread[DownHandler (UDP),5,main]
-------------------------------------------------------
GMS: address is htimes2:34016
-------------------------------------------------------
address is htimes2:34016
<JBossConfiguration>
UDP(mcast_addr=228.1.2.3;mcast_port=45566;ip_ttl=64;ip_mcast=true;mcast_send_buf_size=150000;mcast_recv_buf_size=80000;ucast_send_buf_size=150000;ucast_recv_buf_size=80000;loopback=false):PING(timeout=2000;num_initial_members=3;up_thread=true;down_thread=true):MERGE2(min_interval=5000;max_interval=10000):FD(shun=true;up_thread=true;down_thread=true;timeout=2500;max_tries=5):VERIFY_SUSPECT(timeout=3000;num_msgs=3;up_thread=true;down_thread=true):pbcast.STABLE(desired_avg_gossip=20000;up_thread=true;down_thread=true):pbcast.NAKACK(gc_lag=50;retransmit_timeout=300,600,1200,2400,4800;up_thread=true;down_thread=true):UNICAST(timeout=5000;window_size=100;min_threshold=10;down_thread=true):FRAG(frag_size=8192;down_thread=true;up_thread=true):pbcast.GMS(join_timeout=5000;join_retry_timeout=2000;shun=true;print_local_addr=true):pbcast.STATE_TRANSFER(up_thread=true;down_thread=true)
checking for additional data Thread[main,5,main]
-------------------------------------------------------
GMS: address is htimes2:34018
-------------------------------------------------------
handling config event [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thread[DownHandler (UDP),5,main]
address is htimes2:34018
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Adrian Brock (ejort)
Date: 2003-09-22 15:01
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=9459
Hi Bela,
Your test works for me, however using the JBoss protocol stack
it fails. See attached test.
Regards,
Adrian
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Sacha Labourey (slaboure)
Date: 2003-09-19 08:28
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=95900
Hello Bela,
No, I don't agree, take a look at the code starting at
ClusterPartition.startService() i.e. line 282:
java.util.HashMap staticNodeName = new
java.util.HashMap();
staticNodeName.put("additional_data",
this.nodeName.getBytes());
this.channel.down (new Event(Event.CONFIG,
staticNodeName));
channel.connect(partitionName);
This is exactly what you do in your sample code. Would it be
possible that you have a race condition and that the connect
occurs while the channel.down call is not yet finished? Is it
handle by a single thread (the calling thread) or is it
asynchronous?
It seems that the this.channel.down call does NOT SEND the
event down the stack but INSTEAD queue it and waits for the
channel.connect call.
Bela, do you queue your Events waiting for the
channel.connect call or do you process them asynchronously?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Bela Ban (belaban)
Date: 2003-09-19 00:35
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=34890
Wait, Sacha,
the cluster.log shows clearly that you connect to the
channel *first*, the send down the CONFIG event. This is
incorrect.
Bela
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Bela Ban (belaban)
Date: 2003-09-19 00:25
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=34890
Sacha,
are you passing a Map as arg of the CONFIG event ? Also, the
key has to be "additional_data", e.g. as used in the code
below (you can set a breakpoint here to see what's going on):
in UDP.handleDownEvent():
void handleConfigEvent(HashMap map) {
if(map == null) return;
if(map.containsKey("additional_data"))
additional_data=(byte[])map.get("additional_data");
if(map.containsKey("send_buf_size")) {
mcast_send_buf_size=((Integer)map.get("send_buf_size")).intValue();
ucast_send_buf_size=mcast_send_buf_size;
}
if(map.containsKey("recv_buf_size")) {
mcast_recv_buf_size=((Integer)map.get("recv_buf_size")).intValue();
ucast_recv_buf_size=mcast_recv_buf_size;
}
setBufferSizes();
}
The second thing is that when the member is starting, you
should see the address *with* additional data, ie, the
program below prints the output:
public class AddDataTest {
public static void main(String[] args) {
try {
JChannel c=new JChannel();
Map m=new HashMap();
m.put("additional_data", "Node #1".getBytes());
c.down(new Event(Event.CONFIG, m));
c.connect("bla");
System.out.println("address is " +
c.getLocalAddress());
}
catch(ChannelException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
-------------------------------------------------------
GMS: address is lotusman:50416 (additional data: 7 bytes)
-------------------------------------------------------
address is lotusman:50416 (additional data: 7 bytes)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Adrian Brock (ejort)
Date: 2003-09-18 17:04
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=9459
I still get failures without the default gateway configured.
Attached netstat -an > netstat.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Sacha Labourey (slaboure)
Date: 2003-09-18 10:27
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=95900
That is really strange. Bela, any idea on what is happening?
The thing is that:
- I create the JChannel
- send a config event down the stack THAT CONTAINS
additional data
- connect the JChannel
- ask the JChannel for my node name and the view
and my node name does NOT contain the additional data!?!
Here is the excerpt from the log that shows that:
2003-09-17 21:59:33,277 INFO
[org.jboss.ha.framework.server.ClusterPartition] Starting
=> SL: Here, I've build my "additional data" using some
information from the currently running server, we have no
exception and nothing logged, so everything went fine in
ClusterPartition.generateUniqueNodeName()
=> SL: next cal is JChannel.connect():
2003-09-17 21:59:33,288 DEBUG
[org.jboss.ha.framework.server.ClusterPartition] Starting
ClusterPartition: DefaultPartition
2003-09-17 21:59:33,294 TRACE
[org.javagroups.DefaultPartition] [Wed Sep 17 21:59:33 BST
2003] [INFO] UDP.start(): creating sockets and starting
threads
2003-09-17 21:59:33,296 TRACE
[org.javagroups.DefaultPartition] [Wed Sep 17 21:59:33 BST
2003] [INFO] UDP.createSockets(): unicast sockets will use
interface 192.168.0.51
2003-09-17 21:59:33,305 TRACE
[org.javagroups.DefaultPartition] [Wed Sep 17 21:59:33 BST
2003] [INFO] UDP.createSockets(): socket information:
local_addr=htimes2:34107, mcast_addr=228.1.2.3:45566,
bind_addr=/192.168.0.51, ttl=64
send socket: bound to 192.168.0.51:34106, send buffer
size=65535
receive socket: bound to 192.168.0.51:34107, receive buffer
size=65535
multicast socket: bound to 192.168.0.51:45566, send buffer
size=65535, receive buffer size=65535
2003-09-17 21:59:33,312 TRACE
[org.javagroups.DefaultPartition] [Wed Sep 17 21:59:33 BST
2003] [INFO] UDP.startThreads(): created unicast receiver
thread
2003-09-17 21:59:33,431 TRACE
[org.javagroups.DefaultPartition] [Wed Sep 17 21:59:33 BST
2003] [INFO] FRAG.down(): received CONFIG event:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
2003-09-17 21:59:33,432 TRACE
[org.javagroups.DefaultPartition] [Wed Sep 17 21:59:33 BST
2003] [INFO] NAKACK.down(): received CONFIG event:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
2003-09-17 21:59:33,434 TRACE
[org.javagroups.DefaultPartition] [Wed Sep 17 21:59:33 BST
2003] [INFO] UDP.down(): received CONFIG event:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=> SL: Here we can see that the UDP layer (above) has some
additional_data received by the CONFIG event: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2003-09-17 21:59:33,445 TRACE
[org.javagroups.DefaultPartition] [Wed Sep 17 21:59:33 BST
2003] [INFO] PING.down(): FIND_INITIAL_MBRS
2003-09-17 21:59:35,459 TRACE
[org.javagroups.DefaultPartition] [Wed Sep 17 21:59:35 BST
2003] [INFO] PING.down(): initial mbrs are []
2003-09-17 21:59:35,461 TRACE
[org.javagroups.DefaultPartition] [Wed Sep 17 21:59:35 BST
2003] [DEBUG] ClientGmsImpl.join(): initial_mbrs are []
2003-09-17 21:59:35,461 TRACE
[org.javagroups.DefaultPartition] [Wed Sep 17 21:59:35 BST
2003] [INFO] ClientGmsImpl.join(): no initial members
discovered: creating group as first member
2003-09-17 21:59:35,463 TRACE
[org.javagroups.DefaultPartition] [Wed Sep 17 21:59:35 BST
2003] [INFO] GMS.installView(): view is [htimes2:34107|0]
[htimes2:34107]
2003-09-17 21:59:35,479 TRACE
[org.javagroups.DefaultPartition] [Wed Sep 17 21:59:35 BST
2003] [INFO] GMS.setImpl(): changed role to
org.javagroups.protocols.pbcast.CoordGmsImpl
2003-09-17 21:59:35,479 TRACE
[org.javagroups.DefaultPartition] [Wed Sep 17 21:59:35 BST
2003] [INFO] GMS.becomeCoordinator(): htimes2:34107
became coordinator
2003-09-17 21:59:35,480 TRACE
[org.javagroups.DefaultPartition] [Wed Sep 17 21:59:35 BST
2003] [INFO] ClientGmsImpl.becomeSingletonMember():
created group (first member). My view is [htimes2:34107|0],
impl is org.javagroups.protocols.pbcast.CoordGmsImpl
2003-09-17 21:59:35,605 TRACE
[org.javagroups.DefaultPartition] [Wed Sep 17 21:59:35 BST
2003] [INFO] STABLE.startStableTask(): stable task started;
num_gossip_runs=3, max_gossip_runs=3
2003-09-17 21:59:35,627 TRACE
[org.javagroups.DefaultPartition] [Wed Sep 17 21:59:35 BST
2003] [INFO] MERGE2.FindSubgroups.run(): merge task started
2003-09-17 21:59:35,834 DEBUG
[org.jboss.ha.framework.interfaces.HAPartition.DefaultPartition
] ViewAccepted: initial members set
2003-09-17 21:59:35,835 INFO
[org.jboss.ha.framework.server.ClusterPartition] Starting
channel
=> SL: at this point, the call to JChannel.connect() is finished
and we start the HAPartition which will call
JChannel.getLocalAddress() and the recieved JG IPAddress
object does NOT contain the additional_data: WHY?
2003-09-17 21:59:35,836 DEBUG
[org.jboss.ha.framework.interfaces.HAPartition.DefaultPartition
] get nodeName
2003-09-17 21:59:35,836 DEBUG
[org.jboss.ha.framework.interfaces.HAPartition.DefaultPartition
] Get current members
2003-09-17 21:59:35,837 INFO
[org.jboss.ha.framework.interfaces.HAPartition.DefaultPartition
] Number of cluster members: 1
2003-09-17 21:59:35,837 INFO
[org.jboss.ha.framework.interfaces.HAPartition.DefaultPartition
] Other members: 0
2003-09-17 21:59:35,837 WARN
[org.jboss.ha.framework.interfaces.HAPartition.DefaultPartition
] No additional information has been found in the JavaGroup
address: make sure you are running with a correct version of
JavaGroups and that the protocol you are using supports
the 'additionalData' behaviour
Any idea Bela?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Adrian Brock (ejort)
Date: 2003-09-18 01:51
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=9459
cat /etc/hosts
# Do not remove the following line, or various programs
# that require network functionality will fail.
192.168.0.51 htimes2
127.0.0.1 localhost.localdomain localhost
127.0.0.1 4pcvs
There are no other instances of jboss on the network.
Sorry can't provide netstat, I'm no longer running the
configuration.
One thing occurs to me (I'm configured with a default gateway)
maybe the gateway is interfering with udp? I'll try it again
without the default gateway setting.
Regards,
Adrian
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Scott M Stark (starksm)
Date: 2003-09-18 01:37
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=175228
I have an RH9 system with JDK 1.4.2 that I have tried this
recepie on a few times and don't see the problem. One issue
with the "... 'additionalData'' warning is that if this
occurs you are guarenteed to see an NPE so we should just be
throwing an exception rather than logging a msg and then
proceeding to an NPE.
Do you have another cluster running somewhere else? I'll
have to look into the logs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Adrian Brock (ejort)
Date: 2003-09-17 23:23
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=9459
To construct my two nodes:
cp -r all all2
edit all/conf/jboss-service.xml (uncomment service-binding)
./run.sh -c all and ./run.sh -c all2
Regards,
Adrian
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=376685&aid=808170&group_id=22866
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials.
Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills. Sign up for IBM's
Free Linux Tutorials. Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin.
Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1278&alloc_id=3371&op=click
_______________________________________________
JBoss-Development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
