activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher Shannon <christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Dead lock in 5.13.3
Date Wed, 17 Aug 2016 12:54:34 GMT
This will be kind of tricky to figure out because your jstack only printed
out the stack trace for one of the threads.  Without the other thread is
will be hard to know exactly what caused the deadlock.

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Tim Bain <tbain@alumni.duke.edu> wrote:

> Please submit a bug in JIRA; it should be possible for someone to figure
> out the root cause based on the one stack trace you did get.
>
> Tim
>
> On Aug 16, 2016 9:45 PM, "RuralHunter" <ruralhunter@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I got a dead lock in 5.13.3. But the jstack failed to get the stack of
> the
> > locking threads:
> > Deadlock Detection:
> >
> > Found one Java-level deadlock:
> > =============================
> >
> > "ActiveMQ NIO Worker 93810":
> >  waiting for ownable synchronizer 0x00007fdafc09e548, (a
> > java/util/concurrent/locks/ReentrantReadWriteLock$NonfairSync),
> >  which is held by "ActiveMQ NIO Worker 93322"
> > "ActiveMQ NIO Worker 93322":
> >  waiting for ownable synchronizer 0x00007fdab28706b0, (a
> > java/util/concurrent/locks/ReentrantReadWriteLock$NonfairSync),
> >  which is held by "ActiveMQ NIO Worker 93810"
> >
> > Found a total of 1 deadlock.
> >
> > Thread 26319: (state = BLOCKED)
> > Error occurred during stack walking:
> >
> >
> > Thread 26318: (state = BLOCKED)
> >  - sun.misc.Unsafe.park(boolean, long) @bci=0 (Compiled frame;
> information
> > may be imprecise)
> >  - java.util.concurrent.locks.LockSupport.park(java.lang.Object)
> @bci=14,
> > line=186 (Compiled frame)
> >  -
> > java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.
> > parkAndCheckInterrupt()
> > @bci=1, line=834 (Compiled frame)
> >  -
> > java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.
> doAcquireShared(int)
> > @bci=83, line=964 (Compiled frame)
> >  - java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.
> > acquireShared(int)
> > @bci=10, line=1282 (Compiled frame)
> >  - java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantReadWriteLock$ReadLock.lock()
> > @bci=5,
> > line=731 (Compiled frame)
> >  -
> > org.apache.activemq.broker.region.AbstractRegion.lookup(
> > org.apache.activemq.broker.ConnectionContext,
> > org.apache.activemq.command.ActiveMQDestination, boolean) @bci=10,
> > line=541
> > (Interpreted frame)
> >  -
> > org.apache.activemq.broker.region.AbstractRegion.addConsumer(org.apache.
> > activemq.broker.ConnectionContext,
> > org.apache.activemq.command.ConsumerInfo) @bci=65, line=342 (Compiled
> > frame)
> >  -
> > org.apache.activemq.broker.region.RegionBroker.addConsumer(org.apache.
> > activemq.broker.ConnectionContext,
> > org.apache.activemq.command.ConsumerInfo) @bci=41, line=427 (Compiled
> > frame)
> >  -
> > org.apache.activemq.broker.jmx.ManagedRegionBroker.
> addConsumer(org.apache.
> > activemq.broker.ConnectionContext,
> > org.apache.activemq.command.ConsumerInfo) @bci=3, line=240 (Compiled
> > frame)
> >  -
> > org.apache.activemq.broker.BrokerFilter.addConsumer(org.
> > apache.activemq.broker.ConnectionContext,
> > org.apache.activemq.command.ConsumerInfo) @bci=6, line=103 (Compiled
> > frame)
> >  -
> > org.apache.activemq.broker.BrokerFilter.addConsumer(org.
> > apache.activemq.broker.ConnectionContext,
> > org.apache.activemq.command.ConsumerInfo) @bci=6, line=103 (Compiled
> > frame)
> >  -
> > org.apache.activemq.broker.MutableBrokerFilter.addConsumer(org.apache.
> > activemq.broker.ConnectionContext,
> > org.apache.activemq.command.ConsumerInfo) @bci=6, line=108 (Compiled
> > frame)
> >  -
> > org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection.
> > processAddConsumer(org.apache.activemq.command.ConsumerInfo)
> > @bci=207, line=671 (Compiled frame)
> >  -
> > org.apache.activemq.command.ConsumerInfo.visit(org.apache.
> > activemq.state.CommandVisitor)
> > @bci=2, line=351 (Compiled frame)
> >  -
> > org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection.service(
> > org.apache.activemq.command.Command)
> > @bci=41, line=338 (Compiled frame)
> >  -
> > org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection$1.
> > onCommand(java.lang.Object)
> > @bci=70, line=188 (Compiled frame)
> >  - org.apache.activemq.transport.MutexTransport.onCommand(java.
> > lang.Object)
> > @bci=52, line=50 (Compiled frame)
> >  -
> > org.apache.activemq.transport.WireFormatNegotiator.
> > onCommand(java.lang.Object)
> > @bci=29, line=125 (Compiled frame)
> >  -
> > org.apache.activemq.transport.AbstractInactivityMonitor.
> > onCommand(java.lang.Object)
> > @bci=156, line=300 (Compiled frame)
> >  -
> > org.apache.activemq.transport.TransportSupport.doConsume(
> java.lang.Object)
> > @bci=16, line=83 (Compiled frame)
> >  - org.apache.activemq.transport.tcp.TcpTransport.doRun() @bci=7,
> line=233
> > (Compiled frame)
> >  - org.apache.activemq.transport.tcp.TcpTransport.run() @bci=47,
> line=215
> > (Compiled frame)
> >  - java.lang.Thread.run() @bci=11, line=745 (Interpreted frame)
> >
> > The jstack output seems is not complete(Don't know why). I grep 93810 or
> > 93322 in the stack log but couldn't find anything except the dead lock
> info
> > above.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.
> > nabble.com/Dead-lock-in-5-13-3-tp4715561.html
> > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message