Re: WoMonitor "Failed to contact ..."
Re: WoMonitor "Failed to contact ..."
- Subject: Re: WoMonitor "Failed to contact ..."
- From: Kieran Kelleher <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:30:20 -0400
Resurrecting this old discussion again :-(
OK, a while ago, one xserve "omega" (running Leopard Server 10.5.6, WO
5.4.X wotaskd with fully embedded WO 5.3.3 apps) showed up in
WOMonitor as Failed to Contact again. Remember WOMonitor is running on
Tiger Server 10.4.8 with the wotaskd from WO 5.3.3.
Rather than assume this is a wotaskd/networking problem this time, I
decided to check the WO apps on that server "192.168.3.154" using lsof
and jstack to see if I can find anything unusual and I did:
OK, 192.168.3.154 has 2 apps running on it. pid-479 port 2001) and
pid-43 (port 2004). Also wotaskd is running as pid 43
app pid-479 lsof -i tcp:2001 shows nothing unusual
COMMAND PID USER FD TYPE DEVICE SIZE/OFF NODE NAME
java 479 _appserver 7u IPv6 0x830bb2c 0t0 TCP [::
192.168.3.154]:dc (LISTEN)
app pid-947 has unusual output, lsof -i tcp:2004 reveals 256
CLOSE_WAITs!!! .... this app is not allowing logins
http://67.78.26.66:81/~kieran/misc/lsof_tcp_2004_pid_43.txt
BTW, the other IP 192.168.3.149 shown on the CLOSE_WAIT lines is the
machine that is running WOMonitor/apache, so this would seem to
indicate a lot of hung requests? (that's a question, Chuck ;-) )
lsof for wotaskd itself gives this, which doesn't seem unusual
bash-3.2# lsof -i tcp:1085
COMMAND PID USER FD TYPE DEVICE SIZE/OFF NODE NAME
java 43 _appserver 8u IPv6 0x6e1d258 0t0 TCP [::
192.168.3.154]:webobjects (LISTEN)
java 43 _appserver 11u IPv6 0x830b664 0t0 TCP [::
192.168.3.154]:webobjects->[::192.168.3.154]:49665 (ESTABLISHED)
java 43 _appserver 12u IPv6 0x8e41cd4 0t0 TCP [::
192.168.3.154]:webobjects->[::192.168.3.154]:53449 (ESTABLISHED)
java 479 _appserver 10u IPv6 0x830b8c8 0t0 TCP [::
192.168.3.154]:49665->[::192.168.3.154]:webobjects (ESTABLISHED)
java 947 _appserver 10u IPv6 0x8e7d344 0t0 TCP [::
192.168.3.154]:53449->[::192.168.3.154]:webobjects (ESTABLISHED)
Now looking at the jstack outputs, we also have more useful clues.
jstack on the pid-947 (port 2004) app reveals it has session store
deadlocks!! This is the same app with all the CLOSE_WAITs
http://67.78.26.66:81/~kieran/misc/jstack_pid_947.txt
So, it would seem that the stupid 'Failed to contact" stuff I have
been seeing are really caused by Session Store deadlocks. So, the
first thing I am going to do now is turn OFF concurrent request
handling and turn on Wonder Session Store Deadlock detection for this
app ...... however, I would wager that I will not see any Sesion Store
deadlocks with concurrent request handling turned off!
Any ideas on a strategy for deadlock detection with concurrent request
handling ON?
On Mar 25, 2009, at 10:34 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
On Mar 25, 2009, at 7:21 PM, Kieran Kelleher wrote:
Hi again Chuck,
If you are going to use the the domain name (for example www.website.com
, which resolves to 67.88.91.233 for example) doesn't that mean you
have to open port 1085 on the router between public internet and
that apache/WoMonitor machine?
Apache is behind the firewall. Only ports 80 and 443 go though.
Chuck
-Kieran
On Mar 23, 2009, at 12:25 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
On Mar 21, 2009, at 6:35 PM, Kieran Kelleher wrote:
Hi Chuck,
Still getting this problem after a few days of running .... last
time we discussed, I had updated all the WO servers which run
leopard to use IP address for host name...... I still have not
touched the single only Tiger machine that is apache and runs the
site's WOMonitor and has a couple tiny insignificant WO apps. I
am not ready to upgrade this machine to a Leopard machine just
yet, so I guess that is the next guy to be updated with IP
addresses instead of its Bonjour name ..... but I have a question
for you based on your experience with this:
- For that primary WOMonitor machine which is the main site
webserver, should I change to localhost, 127.0.0.1 or the actual
IP address of the machine in WOMonitor Host settings and wotaskd
properties? (FWIW, for last couple of years, we have used the
Bonjour host.local name style on that machine)
We usually use neither. We use the name that DNS lookups (reverse
lookup working is important too) to the primary IP on that machine.
--
Chuck Hill Senior Consultant / VP Development
Practical WebObjects - for developers who want to increase their
overall knowledge of WebObjects or who are trying to solve specific
problems.
http://www.global-village.net/products/practical_webobjects
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden