Mailing-List: contact common-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: common-issues@hadoop.apache.org
Message-ID: <9610110.14701273617224266.JavaMail.jira@thor>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 18:33:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Konstantin Boudnik (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: common-issues@hadoop.apache.org
Subject: [jira] Commented: (HADOOP-6760) WebServer shouldn't increase port
 number in case of negative port setting caused by Jetty's race
In-Reply-To: <17436829.8001273601621435.JavaMail.jira@thor>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-6760?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12866373#action_12866373 ] 

Konstantin Boudnik commented on HADOOP-6760:
--------------------------------------------

Yes, Eli. This seems to be a valid simplification. We are seeing quite a bunch of -1 ports on our production clusters. And the workaround for HADOOP-6386 was trying to address it. I guess it has done a pretty good job however increasing the port was wrong. 

Two workarounds exist for a purpose, actually. First one HADOOP-4744 is about getting a negative port as the result of initial {{getLocalPort()}} call. However, what we are seeing sometime is that {{getLocalPort()}} can get you a positive number and then when you are trying to bind to it you are getting {{IllegalArgumentException}} because the port is actually negative.... It is apparently caused by some crazy race in Jetty. Therefore, the workaround #2 which verifies if allocated port is actually positive and if isn't it engage all that voodoo ...

So, I believe your simplification won't address the second issue... Please correct me if I'm wrong.

> WebServer shouldn't increase port number in case of negative port setting caused by Jetty's race
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-6760
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-6760
>             Project: Hadoop Common
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 0.20.3
>            Reporter: Konstantin Boudnik
>            Assignee: Konstantin Boudnik
>         Attachments: HADOOP-6760.0.20.patch, HADOOP-6760.patch
>
>
> When a negative port is assigned to a webserver socket (because of a race inside of the Jetty server) the workaround from HADOOP-6386 is increasing the original port number on the next bind attempt. Apparently, this is an incorrect logic and next bind attempt should happen on the same port number if possible.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.