[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7272?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16372834#comment-16372834
 ] 

Julian Reschke commented on OAK-7272:
-------------------------------------

trunk: [r1825065|http://svn.apache.org/r1825065]

> improve BackgroundLeaseUpdate warning messages
> ----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OAK-7272
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7272
>             Project: Jackrabbit Oak
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: documentmk
>            Reporter: Julian Reschke
>            Assignee: Julian Reschke
>            Priority: Minor
>              Labels: candidate_oak_1_8
>             Fix For: 1.9.0, 1.10
>
>         Attachments: OAK-7272.diff, OAK-7272.diff
>
>
> Example for current logging:
> {noformat}
> *WARN* [DocumentNodeStore lease update thread (1)] 
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.DocumentNodeStore 
> BackgroundLeaseUpdate.execute: time since last renewClusterIdLease() call 
> longer than expected: 5338ms
> {noformat}
> Source:
> {noformat}
>         @Override
>         protected void execute(@Nonnull DocumentNodeStore nodeStore) {
>             // OAK-4859 : keep track of invocation time of renewClusterIdLease
>             // and warn if time since last call is longer than 5sec
>             final long now = System.currentTimeMillis();
>             if (lastRenewClusterIdLeaseCall <= 0) {
>                 lastRenewClusterIdLeaseCall = now;
>             } else {
>                 final long diff = now - lastRenewClusterIdLeaseCall;
>                 if (diff > 5000) {
>                     LOG.warn("BackgroundLeaseUpdate.execute: time since last 
> renewClusterIdLease() call longer than expected: {}ms", diff);
>                 }
>                 lastRenewClusterIdLeaseCall = now;
>             }
>             // first renew the clusterId lease
>             nodeStore.renewClusterIdLease();
>         }
> {noformat}
> Observations:
> - the warning message doesn't actually say what the expected delay is
> - we only log when it's exceeded by factor 5
> - the threshold is hardwired; it should be computed based on the actual 
> config (I think)
> Also:
> - we don't measure the time of the actual update operation, so we don't know 
> whether it's a thread scheduling problem or a persistence problem (again, I 
> think)
> [~egli], [~mreutegg] - feedback appreciated.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

Reply via email to