Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AC56200B8B for ; Tue, 4 Oct 2016 21:54:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 89429160ADC; Tue, 4 Oct 2016 19:54:22 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id CEB74160ACC for ; Tue, 4 Oct 2016 21:54:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 81912 invoked by uid 500); 4 Oct 2016 19:54:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact notifications-help@accumulo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: jira@apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list notifications@accumulo.apache.org Received: (qmail 81864 invoked by uid 99); 4 Oct 2016 19:54:20 -0000 Received: from arcas.apache.org (HELO arcas) (140.211.11.28) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Oct 2016 19:54:20 +0000 Received: from arcas.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arcas (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E1D02C2A69 for ; Tue, 4 Oct 2016 19:54:20 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 19:54:20 +0000 (UTC) From: "Josh Elser (JIRA)" To: notifications@accumulo.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Commented] (ACCUMULO-4483) NegativeArraySizeException from scan thread right after minor compaction MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 archived-at: Tue, 04 Oct 2016 19:54:22 -0000 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4483?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15546463#comment-15546463 ] Josh Elser commented on ACCUMULO-4483: -------------------------------------- bq. Not sure. The issue arose on multiple clusters as soon as I upgraded to 1.8.0. We run continuous ingest for our tests, but are we continuously scanning during the ingest? If the batchwalkers, walkers, and/or scanners are started, yes. > NegativeArraySizeException from scan thread right after minor compaction > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: ACCUMULO-4483 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4483 > Project: Accumulo > Issue Type: Bug > Components: tserver > Affects Versions: 1.8.0 > Environment: Accumulo 1.8.0 > Java 1.8.0_72 > Reporter: Dave Marion > Assignee: Dave Marion > Priority: Blocker > Fix For: 1.8.1, 2.0.0 > > Time Spent: 20m > Remaining Estimate: 0h > > I have been getting NegativeArraySizeExceptions after upgrading to Accumulo 1.8.0. I have tracked it down to 2 or more concurrent scans on a tablet that has just undergone minor compaction. The minor compaction thread writes the in-memory map to a local temporary rfile and tries to switch the current iterators to use it instead of the native map. The iterator code in the scan thread may also switch itself to use the local temporary rfile it if notices it before the minor compaction threads performs the switch. This all works up to this point. Shortly after the switch one of the iterator threads will get a NegativeArraySizeException from: > SourceSwitchingIterator.seek() -> SourceSwitchingIterator.readNext() -> MemKeyConversionIterator.seek() -> MemKeyConversionIterator.getTopKeyValue() ->MemValue.decode(). I added a bunch of logging to find that the length of the byte array passed to MemValue.decode is zero. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)