Hi A bit of news. We increased the check delay of the load balancer from 30 secs to 180 secs and he system is still up and running from 48 hours. It seems that the load balancer "is alive" check is a simple socket's open/reset operation on the port 110 (that's why the "connection reset" exception on the pop3 server); so it seems that after a few close enough socket reset operation the system crashes. I guess if the delay is big enough the system actually reclaims the resources correctly, as danny said.
I am afraid that with a simple java program that performs very fast socket open/reset james can crash, which would be a serious bug. If no one made a test like that, I'll try to do it on james 2.2.0 and on james 2.3 and I'll keep the mailing list informed. Cheers Marcello > Da: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Inviato: lunedì 26 febbraio 2007 16.32 > > On 2/26/07, Marcello Marangio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > We thought it wasn't harmless, but after a while (more or less an hour) > the > > system crashes. > > I'm surprised by this, it *should* be the server giving up on a > hanging connection and should be reclaiming resources not leaking > them. > > I don't know if I can reproduce it, but you *should* raise a defect in > JIRA about this: > > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES > > d. > > > > > At the moment the problem happens even if there is only one james > instance > > up and running, i.e. it's not a concurrency problem. > > > > > > > > Any help will be REALLY appreciated. > > > > Thanks > > > > Marcello > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
