OK, had a chance to untangle myself on the flight. Long and short of it is that the problem is still there on trunk (sans-4196 but with the changes above).

Looking at the stack trace some more, I wonder if the issue isn't in deleteLock (part of SolrCoreState.getUpdateLock, but I won't be able to look at it in any detail until tomorrow. One thread has a lock on that and the other is waiting on it, but I don't know yet what other resource is locked up.

FWIW,
Erick


On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Erick Erickson <erickerickson@gmail.com> wrote:
1> opened a JIRA, see: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4398

2> Ran the test against trunk last night, and things locked up. But when I tried to trace back the jstack output against the code I thought I was running, I couldn't get the source to line up so I don't really have anything to report yet. I won't have a chance to run this again until I get home this evening.

If you're really hot to try it yourself in your copious spare time (I know you have a lot <G>), the source for the stress test is attached to the jira. All you have to do is compile it, fire it up with -w -x, I usually give it some room like

java -Xmx1G -jar StresTest.jar -x -w -m=###   
the -m bit is how many minutes to run (default 60). -w means create a bunch of cores in <user home>/tmp/cores. -x means "use old style xml".

It'll churn for a short time and give you a "start solr sever and hit enter' message, at which point I start Solr with solr home pointing to the right place, e.g:
java -Xmx2G -Dsolr.solr.home=/Users/Erick/tmp/cores -jar start.jar

Then hit enter in the stress test program. There are confirmation messages printed out every minute that the stress test is running, I usually just ignore things and occasionally check to see if there have been any confirmation messages lately.

This all runs against trunk if you use the -x option. My stray thought was I wonder if it'd make sense to add this to some kind of regular test process just for yucks....

Like I said, though, I'm more than happy to be the stress-test guinea pig, the above is strictly if you think it would save you time.

My next task is to get it to fail again and make more sense of the stack traces. I'll let you know when I have something more.

Erick


On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Mark Miller <markrmiller@gmail.com> wrote:

On Feb 1, 2013, at 9:02 PM, Erick Erickson <erickerickson@gmail.com> wrote:

> First, about the thread interrupt exceptions; what do you think about not logging them? I could argue that if they are benign, reporting them adds unnecessary stress. I kinda figured they were harmless but thought it might be worth mentioning.

I guess I'd open a JIRA issue to discuss it - we would probably want to consistently tackle the code base. Currently, I think we usually log something on interruptions.

>
> Second, I re-worked the stress test program to use the old-style solr.xml file then re-ran the tests from trunk w/o any of the changes for SOLR-4196. I worked for a couple of hours then I had to stop, but tonight it ran for just a few minutes (I updated the code this morning) and got the same error (stack below just in case I'm imagining things). Next step I guess is I'll apply the changes you indicated above to trunk and see if it I can make it happen again. That said, it's a bit of apples-to-oranges but worth doing nonetheless... It's still clearly happening from some relatively new code related to the transient core thing given the trace is coming form removeEldestEntry eventually….

Since you have the tests and can easily check this, I would appreciate it. We would like to fix this.

The below is the same issue. I'm pretty sure the patch addresses it (though don't commit it, it's still hackey), but confirmation would be great.

- Mark

>
>
>
> Found one Java-level deadlock:
> =============================
> "commitScheduler-15616-thread-1":
>   waiting to lock monitor 7f920387fd58 (object 7879df120, a org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState),
>   which is held by "qtp1490642445-15"
> "qtp1490642445-15":
>   waiting to lock monitor 7f9204803bc0 (object 786d3df78, a java.lang.Object),
>   which is held by "commitScheduler-15616-thread-1"
>
> Java stack information for the threads listed above:
> ===================================================
> "commitScheduler-15616-thread-1":
>       at org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState.getIndexWriter(DefaultSolrCoreState.java:78)
>       - waiting to lock <7879df120> (a org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState)
>       at org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore.openNewSearcher(SolrCore.java:1359)
>       at org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore.getSearcher(SolrCore.java:1535)
>       at org.apache.solr.update.DirectUpdateHandler2.commit(DirectUpdateHandler2.java:550)
>       - locked <786d3df78> (a java.lang.Object)
>       at org.apache.solr.update.CommitTracker.run(CommitTracker.java:216)
>       at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:439)
>       at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask$Sync.innerRun(FutureTask.java:303)
>       at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:138)
>       at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:98)
>       at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:206)
>       at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.runTask(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:886)
>       at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:908)
>       at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:680)
> "qtp1490642445-15":
>       at org.apache.solr.update.DirectUpdateHandler2.closeWriter(DirectUpdateHandler2.java:705)
>       - waiting to lock <786d3df78> (a java.lang.Object)
>       at org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState.closeIndexWriter(DefaultSolrCoreState.java:64)
>       - locked <7879df120> (a org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState)
>       at org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState.close(DefaultSolrCoreState.java:272)
>       - locked <7879df120> (a org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState)
>       at org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore.decrefSolrCoreState(SolrCore.java:888)
>       - locked <7879df120> (a org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState)
>       at org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore.close(SolrCore.java:980)
>       at org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer$2.removeEldestEntry(CoreContainer.java:385)
>       at java.util.LinkedHashMap.addEntry(LinkedHashMap.java:410)
>       at java.util.HashMap.put(HashMap.java:385)
>       at org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer.registerCore(CoreContainer.java:864)
>       - locked <785614df8> (a org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer$2)
>       at org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer.registerLazyCore(CoreContainer.java:829)
>       at org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer.getCore(CoreContainer.java:1321)
>       at org.apache.solr.servlet.SolrDispatchFilter.doFilter(SolrDispatchFilter.java:190)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler$CachedChain.doFilter(ServletHandler.java:1307)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler.doHandle(ServletHandler.java:453)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ScopedHandler.handle(ScopedHandler.java:137)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.security.SecurityHandler.handle(SecurityHandler.java:560)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.session.SessionHandler.doHandle(SessionHandler.java:231)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ContextHandler.doHandle(ContextHandler.java:1072)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler.doScope(ServletHandler.java:382)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.session.SessionHandler.doScope(SessionHandler.java:193)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ContextHandler.doScope(ContextHandler.java:1006)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ScopedHandler.handle(ScopedHandler.java:135)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ContextHandlerCollection.handle(ContextHandlerCollection.java:255)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.HandlerCollection.handle(HandlerCollection.java:154)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.HandlerWrapper.handle(HandlerWrapper.java:116)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.Server.handle(Server.java:365)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.AbstractHttpConnection.handleRequest(AbstractHttpConnection.java:485)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.BlockingHttpConnection.handleRequest(BlockingHttpConnection.java:53)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.AbstractHttpConnection.headerComplete(AbstractHttpConnection.java:926)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.AbstractHttpConnection$RequestHandler.headerComplete(AbstractHttpConnection.java:988)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.http.HttpParser.parseNext(HttpParser.java:635)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.http.HttpParser.parseAvailable(HttpParser.java:235)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.BlockingHttpConnection.handle(BlockingHttpConnection.java:72)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.bio.SocketConnector$ConnectorEndPoint.run(SocketConnector.java:264)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.QueuedThreadPool.runJob(QueuedThreadPool.java:608)
>       at org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.QueuedThreadPool$3.run(QueuedThreadPool.java:543)
>       at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:680)
>
> Found 1 deadlock.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Mark Miller <markrmiller@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Without evidence of further damage, that is fine - it just means a thread was interrupted.
>
> - Mark
>
> On Jan 30, 2013, at 10:52 AM, Erick Erickson <erickerickson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > FWIW, by the way, I'm getting some exceptions in the solr log, here are the two patterns I see on a quick look (this is with my hacks, but the test of your patch also produced some like this, I think they were the same). Your comment about trying this with the old-style XML is getting more compelling....
> >
> > But do note that the stress tests still ran to completion OK, which means that all documents sent to the server made it into the indexes....
> >
> > Jan 30, 2013 10:20:27 AM org.apache.solr.common.SolrException log
> > SEVERE: java.lang.InterruptedException
> >       at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.acquireSharedInterruptibly(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:1279)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask$Sync.innerGet(FutureTask.java:218)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.get(FutureTask.java:83)
> >       at org.apache.solr.update.DirectUpdateHandler2.commit(DirectUpdateHandler2.java:597)
> >       at org.apache.solr.update.CommitTracker.run(CommitTracker.java:216)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:439)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask$Sync.innerRun(FutureTask.java:303)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:138)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:98)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:206)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.runTask(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:886)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:908)
> >       at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:680)
> >
> >
> > FWIW
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 8:46 AM, Erick Erickson <erickerickson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > No joy. It ran to completion on one of my machines for an hour, but not the other, stack traces below.
> >
> > About running without the patch. The other thing that's different is I've changed where the core.close happens in the patch as opposed to the old code, which may confuse things. OTOH, it'd be interesting to try since my changes to where I called close were based on a faulty assumption about where the lock was occurring. I did a quick hack that I have yet to test making the stress tester bang up old-style solr.xml setups, but haven't run it yet. I can give it a try against an unmodified trunk if you think that would generate useful information but I sadly fear it's an apples/oranges comparison.
> >
> > I'm on IM or we can voice chat if you want to strategize, but I won't be able to devote much time to this until tonight or tomorrow. I can apply patches and run tests all day though....
> >
> > Although before digging to deeply, I had to cobble the patch into DefaultSolrCoreState and I might have screwed it up. Is the finally block  containing if (yielded) in the right place?
> >
> > Here's my patched code, but maybe you could just send me the whole file? I haven't changed it outside this patch....
> >
> >     synchronized (writerPauseLock) {
> >       // we need to wait for the Writer to fall out of use
> >       // first lets stop it from being lent out
> >       pauseWriter = true;
> >       // then lets wait until its out of use
> >       log.info("Waiting until IndexWriter is unused... core=" + coreName);
> >       boolean yielded = false;
> >       try {
> >         while (!writerFree) {
> >           // yield the commit lock
> >           core.getUpdateHandler().yieldCommitLock();
> >           yielded = true;
> >           try {
> >             writerPauseLock.wait(100);
> >           } catch (InterruptedException e) {}
> >           if (closed) {
> >             throw new RuntimeException("SolrCoreState already closed");
> >           }
> >         }
> >       } finally {
> >         if (yielded) {
> >         core.getUpdateHandler().getCommitLock();
> >         }
> >       }
> >       try {
> >         if (indexWriter != null) {
> >           if (!rollback) {
> >             try {
> >
> >
> >
> > Stack trace for the deadlock bits, full file attached:
> >
> > Found one Java-level deadlock:
> > =============================
> > "commitScheduler-36850-thread-1":
> >   waiting to lock monitor 7fc2c625f7f8 (object 7429863a0, a org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState),
> >   which is held by "qtp132616134-30"
> > "qtp132616134-30":
> >   waiting for ownable synchronizer 740bc1108, (a java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantLock$NonfairSync),
> >   which is held by "commitScheduler-36850-thread-1"
> >
> > Java stack information for the threads listed above:
> > ===================================================
> > "commitScheduler-36850-thread-1":
> >       at org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState.getIndexWriter(DefaultSolrCoreState.java:78)
> >       - waiting to lock <7429863a0> (a org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState)
> >       at org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore.openNewSearcher(SolrCore.java:1359)
> >       at org.apache.solr.update.DirectUpdateHandler2.commit(DirectUpdateHandler2.java:561)
> >       - locked <74066b838> (a java.lang.Object)
> >       at org.apache.solr.update.CommitTracker.run(CommitTracker.java:216)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:439)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask$Sync.innerRun(FutureTask.java:303)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:138)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:98)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:206)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.runTask(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:886)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:908)
> >       at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:680)
> > "qtp132616134-30":
> >       at sun.misc.Unsafe.park(Native Method)
> >       - parking to wait for  <740bc1108> (a java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantLock$NonfairSync)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.locks.LockSupport.park(LockSupport.java:156)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.parkAndCheckInterrupt(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:811)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.acquireQueued(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:842)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.acquire(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:1178)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantLock$NonfairSync.lock(ReentrantLock.java:186)
> >       at java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantLock.lock(ReentrantLock.java:262)
> >       at org.apache.solr.update.DirectUpdateHandler2.closeWriter(DirectUpdateHandler2.java:668)
> >       at org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState.closeIndexWriter(DefaultSolrCoreState.java:64)
> >       - locked <7429863a0> (a org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState)
> >       at org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState.close(DefaultSolrCoreState.java:280)
> >       - locked <7429863a0> (a org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState)
> >       at org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore.decrefSolrCoreState(SolrCore.java:888)
> >       - locked <7429863a0> (a org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState)
> >       at org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore.close(SolrCore.java:980)
> >       at org.apache.solr.core.CoreMaps.putTransientCore(CoreContainer.java:1466)
> >       at org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer.registerCore(CoreContainer.java:730)
> >       at org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer.getCore(CoreContainer.java:1138)
> >       at org.apache.solr.servlet.SolrDispatchFilter.doFilter(SolrDispatchFilter.java:190)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler$CachedChain.doFilter(ServletHandler.java:1307)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler.doHandle(ServletHandler.java:453)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ScopedHandler.handle(ScopedHandler.java:137)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.security.SecurityHandler.handle(SecurityHandler.java:560)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.session.SessionHandler.doHandle(SessionHandler.java:231)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ContextHandler.doHandle(ContextHandler.java:1072)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler.doScope(ServletHandler.java:382)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.session.SessionHandler.doScope(SessionHandler.java:193)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ContextHandler.doScope(ContextHandler.java:1006)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ScopedHandler.handle(ScopedHandler.java:135)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ContextHandlerCollection.handle(ContextHandlerCollection.java:255)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.HandlerCollection.handle(HandlerCollection.java:154)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.HandlerWrapper.handle(HandlerWrapper.java:116)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.Server.handle(Server.java:365)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.AbstractHttpConnection.handleRequest(AbstractHttpConnection.java:485)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.BlockingHttpConnection.handleRequest(BlockingHttpConnection.java:53)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.AbstractHttpConnection.content(AbstractHttpConnection.java:937)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.AbstractHttpConnection$RequestHandler.content(AbstractHttpConnection.java:998)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.http.HttpParser.parseNext(HttpParser.java:948)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.http.HttpParser.parseAvailable(HttpParser.java:240)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.BlockingHttpConnection.handle(BlockingHttpConnection.java:72)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.server.bio.SocketConnector$ConnectorEndPoint.run(SocketConnector.java:264)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.QueuedThreadPool.runJob(QueuedThreadPool.java:608)
> >       at org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.QueuedThreadPool$3.run(QueuedThreadPool.java:543)
> >       at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:680)
> >
> > Found 1 deadlock.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Erick Erickson <erickerickson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > bq: I don't follow this at all - of course you could rapidly load and unload cores at the same time before this patch?
> >
> > Not quite what I was trying to say. The stress test opens and closes cores a LOT. Of course you could open and close cores simultaneously before. In fact given what I think is a new pattern I'm amazed that there aren't a lot more problems, that's some damn good code. What's new is the stress test opens and closes a core with every call. From 30 threads, 15 indexing and 15 querying.
> >
> > bq: If you cannot easily produce a test that causes deadlock without your patch
> >
> > I don't know how you'd really write a predictable junit test, the time window for the race here is small. I had to run my stress test for 20-30 minutes to hit it. I think I can modify the stress test to use old-style solr.xml which I could run against current trunk, is it worth it though after your second look? Note that this open/closing a core every call from the stress test wasn't really possible the same way before SOLR-1028, one of the keys is that the transient cores have to be aged out. The bolds below are new code (SOLR-1028+):
> >
> > at org.apache.solr.core.CoreMaps$1.removeEldestEntry(CoreContainer.java:1384)
> > ......
> > at org.apache.solr.core.CoreMaps.putTransientCore(CoreContainer.java:1444)
> >
> >
> > If you still think it's worthwhile, I have some travel time tomorrow that I could use to make this test run with old-style solr.xml. Let me know. I'm also wondering if the stress test should go into our test suite somewhere. It's possible to bring the stress test into junit I think, there's nothing magic about it. But it might be better as an external test that we run on, say, a nightly or weekly basis, is there precedent?
> >
> > bq: Because they are different locks protecting different state.
> >
> > So you're saying that synchronizing the method actually is protecting the SolrCore that's passed as a parameter? Otherwise I don't get it, seems like moving the synchronized block to the first line of, e.g.,  newIndexWriter and removing synchronized from the method signature would be sufficient. That said, my hack of removing the synchronized from the method signature was more to poke that what I thought I saw than a well thought-out solution... Which is why I'm glad you're looking too...
> >
> > Yes, the code attached to the JIRA is the latest. You've got enough on your plate I'm sure, I'll apply your patch and let you know. I had a little trouble with SVN applying it cleanly, but  I think I reconciled it correctly...
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:43 PM, Mark Miller <markrmiller@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Do you have your latest work attached to the issue? If so, I'll start working with it locally.
> >
> > For now, can you try this experimental, test patch and see what the results are?
> >
> > Index: solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/update/DefaultSolrCoreState.java
> > ===================================================================
> > --- solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/update/DefaultSolrCoreState.java (revision 1440275)
> > +++ solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/update/DefaultSolrCoreState.java (working copy)
> > @@ -135,13 +135,24 @@
> >        pauseWriter = true;
> >        // then lets wait until its out of use
> >        log.info("Waiting until IndexWriter is unused... core=" + coreName);
> > +
> > +      boolean yielded = false;
> > +      try {
> >        while (!writerFree) {
> > -        try {
> > -          writerPauseLock.wait(100);
> > -        } catch (InterruptedException e) {}
> > -
> > -        if (closed) {
> > -          throw new RuntimeException("SolrCoreState already closed");
> > +          // yield the commit lock
> > +          core.getUpdateHandler().yieldCommitLock();
> > +          yielded = true;
> > +          try {
> > +            writerPauseLock.wait(100);
> > +          } catch (InterruptedException e) {}
> > +
> > +          if (closed) {
> > +            throw new RuntimeException("SolrCoreState already closed");
> > +          }
> > +        }
> > +      } finally {
> > +        if (yielded) {
> > +          core.getUpdateHandler().getCommitLock();
> >          }
> >        }
> >
> > Index: solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/update/UpdateHandler.java
> > ===================================================================
> > --- solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/update/UpdateHandler.java        (revision 1440275)
> > +++ solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/update/UpdateHandler.java        (working copy)
> > @@ -189,4 +189,10 @@
> >    }
> >
> >    public abstract void split(SplitIndexCommand cmd) throws IOException;
> > +
> > +
> > +  public void getCommitLock() {}
> > +
> > +
> > +  public void yieldCommitLock() {}
> >  }
> > Index: solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/update/DirectUpdateHandler2.java
> > ===================================================================
> > --- solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/update/DirectUpdateHandler2.java (revision 1440275)
> > +++ solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/update/DirectUpdateHandler2.java (working copy)
> > @@ -830,4 +830,13 @@
> >    public CommitTracker getSoftCommitTracker() {
> >      return softCommitTracker;
> >    }
> > +
> > +  public void getCommitLock() {
> > +    commitLock.lock();
> > +  }
> > +
> > +
> > +  public void yieldCommitLock() {
> > +    commitLock.unlock();
> > +  }
> >  }
> >
> >
> > On Jan 29, 2013, at 11:24 PM, Mark Miller <markrmiller@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Digging into the stack traces...
> > >
> > > This shows a thread waiting for the commit lock trying to close an index writer.
> > >
> > > There is another thread with the commit lock that is waiting for the writer to be returned.
> > >
> > > That seems to be the situation - a race around the commit lock.
> > >
> > > Needs some thought.
> > >
> > > - Mark
> > >
> > > On Jan 29, 2013, at 8:31 AM, Erick Erickson <erickerickson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Java stack information for the threads listed above:
> > >> ===================================================
> > >> "commitScheduler-42617-thread-1":
> > >> at org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState.getIndexWriter(DefaultSolrCoreState.java:78)
> > >> - waiting to lock <78b4aa518> (a org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState)
> > >> at org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore.openNewSearcher(SolrCore.java:1359)
> > >> at org.apache.solr.update.DirectUpdateHandler2.commit(DirectUpdateHandler2.java:561)
> > >> - locked <7884ca730> (a java.lang.Object)
> > >> at org.apache.solr.update.CommitTracker.run(CommitTracker.java:216)
> > >> at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:439)
> > >> at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask$Sync.innerRun(FutureTask.java:303)
> > >> at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:138)
> > >> at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:98)
> > >> at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:206)
> > >> at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.runTask(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:886)
> > >> at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:908)
> > >> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:680)
> > >>
> > >> *********
> > >> Other thread
> > >> "qtp1401888126-32":
> > >> at sun.misc.Unsafe.park(Native Method)
> > >> - parking to wait for  <788d73208> (a
> > >> java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantLock$NonfairSync)
> > >> at java.util.concurrent.locks.LockSupport.park(LockSupport.java:156)
> > >> at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.parkAndCheckInterrupt(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:811)
> > >> at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.acquireQueued(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:842)
> > >> at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.acquire(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:1178)
> > >> at java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantLock$NonfairSync.lock(ReentrantLock.java:186)
> > >> at java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantLock.lock(ReentrantLock.java:262)
> > >> at org.apache.solr.update.DirectUpdateHandler2.closeWriter(DirectUpdateHandler2.java:668)
> > >> at org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState.closeIndexWriter(DefaultSolrCoreState.java:64)
> > >> - locked <78b4aa518> (a org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState)
> > >> at org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState.close(DefaultSolrCoreState.java:272)
> > >> - locked <78b4aa518> (a org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState)
> > >> at org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore.decrefSolrCoreState(SolrCore.java:888)
> > >> - locked <78b4aa518> (a org.apache.solr.update.DefaultSolrCoreState)
> > >> at org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore.close(SolrCore.java:980)
> > >> at org.apache.solr.core.CoreMaps.putTransientCore(CoreContainer.java:1465)
> > >> at org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer.registerCore(CoreContainer.java:730)
> > >> at org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer.getCore(CoreContainer.java:1137)
> > >> at org.apache.solr.servlet.SolrDispatchFilter.doFilter(SolrDispatchFilter.java:190)
> > >> at
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org