tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From bugzi...@apache.org
Subject DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33510] New: - recover_wait_time for workers in_error_state should be calculated using difftime()
Date Fri, 11 Feb 2005 01:54:35 GMT
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33510>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33510

           Summary: recover_wait_time for workers in_error_state should be
                    calculated using difftime()
           Product: Tomcat 5
           Version: 5.0.30
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Solaris
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: Connector:AJP
        AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org
        ReportedBy: chuck_betts@intuit.com


I was diagnosing some failover issues we were having with our network setup, 
and I noticed strange logs when testing the error behavior when a tomcat server 
physically goes down.  The logs look like this (severly hacked for readability):

[Thu Feb 10 17:17:31 2005] [4106:0] [debug] jk_lb_worker.c (300): worker 
candidate giraffe (1) is in error state - will not yet recover (42 < 3600)
[Thu Feb 10 17:17:32 2005] [4106:0] [debug] jk_lb_worker.c (300): worker 
candidate giraffe (1) is in error state - will not yet recover (43 < 3600)
[Thu Feb 10 17:18:30 2005] [4101:0] [debug] jk_lb_worker.c (300): worker 
candidate giraffe (1) is in error state - will not yet recover (2475 < 3600)
[Thu Feb 10 17:19:24 2005] [4102:0] [debug] jk_lb_worker.c (300): worker 
candidate giraffe (1) is in error state - will not yet recover (1428 < 3600)

3600 is what I set the configuration value to.  The first number should be 
increasing by one per second, but as you can see when the minute changes, the 
number jumps dramatically.  So the time_t implementation I compiled with doesnt 
seem to support a simple time_t1 - time_t2 to get an elapsed time, as it is in 
the source code (jk_lb_worker.c:297).
Doing a little snooping found the recommendation to use the method difftime() 
to get the elapsed time value.  Should you be using this instead?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

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


Mime
View raw message