This is a known bug in 5.0 - please use the latest 5.1 snapshot
On Jan 16, 2008, at 3:42 AM, peter royal wrote:
we're having the occasional/random explosion of threads in our
broker. it appears to be related to the client using the failover
transport and reconnecting to the broker, and the broker not
cleaning itself up properly.
there are a bunch of threads doing:
"ActiveMQ Transport: tcp:///127.0.0.1:40170" daemon prio=1
tid=0x00002aaafa63a8c0 nid=0x33b8 waiting for monitor entry
[0x00002aab08340000..0x00002aab08340b90]
at
org
.apache
.activemq
.broker
.TransportConnection.processAddConnection(TransportConnection.java:
626)
- waiting to lock <0x00002aaab79f3bb0> (a java.lang.Object)
at
org
.apache
.activemq
.broker
.jmx
.ManagedTransportConnection
.processAddConnection(ManagedTransportConnection.java:86)
at
org.apache.activemq.command.ConnectionInfo.visit(ConnectionInfo.java:
125)
at
org
.apache
.activemq
.broker.TransportConnection.service(TransportConnection.java:281)
at org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection
$1.onCommand(TransportConnection.java:178)
at
org
.apache
.activemq.transport.TransportFilter.onCommand(TransportFilter.java:67)
at
org
.apache
.activemq
.transport.WireFormatNegotiator.onCommand(WireFormatNegotiator.java:
134)
at
org
.apache
.activemq
.transport.InactivityMonitor.onCommand(InactivityMonitor.java:138)
- locked <0x00002aaab90acb78> (a
org.apache.activemq.transport.InactivityMonitor$1)
at
org
.apache
.activemq.transport.TransportSupport.doConsume(TransportSupport.java:
83)
at
org
.apache.activemq.transport.tcp.TcpTransport.doRun(TcpTransport.java:
185)
at
org.apache.activemq.transport.tcp.TcpTransport.run(TcpTransport.java:
172)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:595)
and
"ActiveMQ: Activity Generator: /127.0.0.1:51040" daemon prio=1
tid=0x00002aaafcb9dec0 nid=0x7f4a waiting on condition
[0x000000004232f000..0x0000000042330a90]
at sun.misc.Unsafe.park(Native Method)
at java.util.concurrent.locks.LockSupport.park(LockSupport.java:118)
at
java
.util
.concurrent
.locks
.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer
.parkAndCheckInterrupt(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:716)
at
java
.util
.concurrent
.locks
.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer
.doAcquireSharedInterruptibly(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:872)
at
java
.util
.concurrent
.locks
.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer
.acquireSharedInterruptibly(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:1179)
at java.util.concurrent.CountDownLatch.await(CountDownLatch.java:199)
at
org
.apache.activemq.transport.tcp.TcpTransport.stop(TcpTransport.java:
442)
at
org
.apache
.activemq.transport.InactivityMonitor.stop(InactivityMonitor.java:66)
at
org
.apache.activemq.transport.TransportFilter.stop(TransportFilter.java:
63)
at
org
.apache
.activemq
.transport.WireFormatNegotiator.stop(WireFormatNegotiator.java:78)
at
org
.apache.activemq.transport.TransportFilter.stop(TransportFilter.java:
63)
at
org
.apache
.activemq
.broker
.TransportConnection.disposeTransport(TransportConnection.java:1239)
at
org
.apache
.activemq.broker.TransportConnection.doStop(TransportConnection.java:
917)
at
org
.apache
.activemq
.broker
.jmx
.ManagedTransportConnection.doStop(ManagedTransportConnection.java:74)
at
org
.apache
.activemq.broker.TransportConnection.stop(TransportConnection.java:
876)
at
org.apache.activemq.util.ServiceSupport.dispose(ServiceSupport.java:
40)
at
org
.apache
.activemq
.broker
.TransportConnection
.serviceTransportException(TransportConnection.java:206)
at org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection
$1.onException(TransportConnection.java:185)
at
org
.apache
.activemq.transport.TransportFilter.onException(TransportFilter.java:
98)
at
org
.apache
.activemq.transport.TransportFilter.onException(TransportFilter.java:
98)
at
org
.apache
.activemq
.transport
.WireFormatNegotiator.onException(WireFormatNegotiator.java:143)
at
org
.apache
.activemq
.transport.InactivityMonitor.onException(InactivityMonitor.java:169)
at org.apache.activemq.transport.InactivityMonitor
$3.run(InactivityMonitor.java:83)
i've put a full thread dump up at
http://fotap.org/~osi/files/mqbroker-thread-dump.txt.gz
apologies if this is fixed. we did have a similar issue with a 5.0
snapshot that was resolved by https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1512
-pete
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://fotap.org/~osi
