tomcat-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Carl" <c...@etrak-plus.com>
Subject Re: Tomcat dies suddenly
Date Thu, 04 Feb 2010 20:15:42 GMT
Tsirkin,

I doubt that will help as the server already has 19GB of swap and the swap 
is never touched.

Thanks for the suggestion.

Carl
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tsirkin Evgeny" <tsirkin@gmail.com>
To: "Tomcat Users List" <users@tomcat.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 3:11 PM
Subject: Re: Tomcat dies suddenly


> Just an advise .
> I don't know what the problem is,however suppose that this is OOM killer -
> why not just
> add some GB of swap disk spae is even chiper then RAM
> Evgeny
>
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 9:04 PM, Carl <carl@etrak-plus.com> wrote:
>
>> Chuck and Dan,
>>
>> First, some housekeeping to respond to your points and questions:
>>
>> 1.  The 3.6GB I stated in my prior email to Dan was the total memory 
>> used.
>> The Tomcat process (from top) was 1.7-1.8GB.
>>
>> 2.  I did not know that Linux cached disk accesses in RAM.  I have worked
>> with Linux (and Unix and Aix before that) for a number of years but never
>> understood all the pieces... as long as it worked, I was happy (and, in
>> general, I didn't ask much of the systems.)
>>
>> To sum up your observations:  The memory usage I was seeing was not 
>> unusual
>> and not likely the source of the problem.
>>
>> The system failed again about 30 minutes ago.  The overall memory dropped
>> to 2.9GB (from top.)
>>
>> The last entries in catalina.out were:
>>
>> 41608.326: [GC 41608.326: [ParNew: 72021K->4186K(76672K), 0.0674360 secs]
>> 376022K->309373K(1040064K) icms_dc=0 , 0.0675430 secs] [Times: user=0.25
>> sys=0.00, real=0.07 secs]
>> 41610.048: [GC 41610.048: [ParNew: 72346K->8512K(76672K), 0.0408460 secs]
>> 377533K->318233K(1040064K) icms_dc=0 , 0.0409480 secs] [Times: user=0.15
>> sys=0.00, real=0.04 secs]
>>
>> The GC information in catalina.out before that was:
>>
>> 41391.749: [GC 41391.749: [ParNew: 70179K->2466K(76672K), 0.0064220 secs]
>> 374180K->306467K(1040064K) icms_dc=0 , 0.0065240 secs] [Times: user=0.02
>> sys=0.00,
>> real=0.01 secs]
>> 41393.383: [GC 41393.383: [ParNew: 70626K->2571K(76672K), 0.0059940 secs]
>> 374627K->306572K(1040064K) icms_dc=0 , 0.0060940 secs] [Times: user=0.03
>> sys=0.00,
>> real=0.01 secs]
>>
>> and before that:
>>
>> 41216.669: [GC 41216.669: [ParNew: 69204K->2621K(76672K), 0.0068300 secs]
>> 367414K->300832K(1040064K) icms_dc=0 , 0.0069380 secs] [Times: user=0.02
>> sys=0.00,
>> real=0.00 secs]
>> 41216.710: [GC 41216.710: [ParNew: 70720K->3097K(76672K), 0.0064720 secs]
>> 368930K->301364K(1040064K) icms_dc=0 , 0.0065740 secs] [Times: user=0.03
>> sys=0.01,
>> real=0.00 secs]
>> 41216.750: [GC 41216.750: [ParNew: 71117K->3241K(76672K), 0.0063760 secs]
>> 369384K->301618K(1040064K) icms_dc=0 , 0.0064780 secs] [Times: user=0.03
>> sys=0.00,
>> real=0.00 secs]
>>
>> The /var/log/messages from that machine for today were:
>>
>> Feb  4 00:08:05 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 00:28:05 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 00:48:05 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 01:08:05 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 01:28:05 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 01:48:05 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 02:08:05 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 02:28:05 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 02:48:05 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 03:08:05 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 03:28:05 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 03:48:05 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 04:08:05 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 04:28:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 04:48:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 05:08:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 05:28:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 05:48:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 06:08:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 06:28:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 06:48:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 07:08:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 07:28:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 07:48:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 08:08:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 08:28:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 08:48:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 09:08:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 09:28:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 09:33:32 tomcat2 /usr/sbin/gpm[3414]: *** info [mice.c(1766)]:
>> Feb  4 09:33:32 tomcat2 /usr/sbin/gpm[3414]: imps2: Auto-detected
>> intellimouse PS/2
>> Feb  4 09:48:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 10:08:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 10:28:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 10:48:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 11:08:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 11:28:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 11:48:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 12:08:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 12:28:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 12:48:06 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 13:08:07 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 13:28:07 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>> Feb  4 13:48:07 tomcat2 -- MARK --
>>
>> I don't see anything here and this file has looked pretty much like this
>> every failure.
>>
>> JAVA_OPTS in catalina.sh are:
>>
>> JAVA_OPTS="-Xms1024m -Xmx1024m -XX:PermSize=384m -XX:MaxPermSize=384m
>> -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC -XX:+CMSIncrementalMode -XX:+PrintGCDetails
>> -XX:+PrintGCTimeStamps -XX:+HeapDumpOnOutOfMemoryError
>> -XX:HeapDumpPath=/usr/local/tomcat/logs"
>>
>> I checked /usr/local/tomcat/logs but found only the usual files.  The
>> information was in catalina.2010-02-04.log showed our nightly restart of
>> Tomcat but nothing more recent.  There were, however, several entries 
>> like
>> the following that indicate some kind of problem:
>>
>> Feb 4, 2010 1:10:03 AM org.apache.catalina.loader.WebappClassLoader
>> clearThreadLocalMap
>> SEVERE: A web application created a ThreadLocal with key of type
>> [java.lang.ThreadLocal] (value [java.lang.ThreadLocal@68758d7b]) and a
>> value of type [null]
>> (value 
>> [net.sf.jasperreports.engine.export.legacy.BorderOffset$1@7b47951c])
>> but failed to remove it when the web application was stopped. To prevent 
>> a
>> memory
>> leak, the ThreadLocal has been forcibly removed.
>>
>> Should I be concerned about this problem right now?
>>
>> Any ideas?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Caldarale, Charles R" <
>> Chuck.Caldarale@unisys.com>
>> To: "Tomcat Users List" <users@tomcat.apache.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 12:46 PM
>> Subject: RE: Tomcat dies suddenly
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Carl [mailto:carl@etrak-plus.com]
>>> Subject: Re: Tomcat dies suddenly
>>>
>>> if I understand it correctly, Tomcat is (mostly) running in
>>> the heap and should, therefore, not be requiring more memory
>>>
>>
>> Not necessarily.  The real memory used by a Java process can continue to
>> climb until all the pages assigned to the heap and associated spaces have
>> actually been touched.  That might not happen for quite some time,
>> especially in PermGen.
>>
>> However, that is slowly being eaten away by something.
>>> I would have expected the usage to flatten out and then
>>> fluctuate about that number.  This implies a memory
>>> leak someplace in the system.
>>>
>>
>> Probably not.  As Dan explained, that's normal file caching behavior.
>>
>> - Chuck
>>
>>
>> THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY
>> MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you 
>> received
>> this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its
>> attachments from all computers.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
>>
>>
> 


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


Mime
View raw message