Mailing-List: contact user-help@zookeeper.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@zookeeper.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CANLc_9LLYy9Hor7A7Gvm7WVVbOz+Ky27M0NvscrYmYCezVN17A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1717792521.2377662.1472602547300.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1717792521.2377662.1472602547300@mail.yahoo.com> <CANLc_9LLYy9Hor7A7Gvm7WVVbOz+Ky27M0NvscrYmYCezVN17A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Benjamin Reed <breed@apache.org>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 22:47:11 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKR25ES3TDWChrLd-j3aD7HAPwQUsRmbKigbjkP8XaOqNS1YRg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Issue with NettyServerCnxn.java
To: Patrick Hunt <phunt@apache.org>
Cc: DevZooKeeper <dev@zookeeper.apache.org>, yuliya Feldman <yufeldman@yahoo.com>,
	"user@zookeeper.apache.org" <user@zookeeper.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c08bc7ecfd540053b6bbece
archived-at: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 05:47:15 -0000

--94eb2c08bc7ecfd540053b6bbece
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

if i remember correctly the case in sendResponse where it is catching the
IOException is due to the fact that we are opportunistically trying to send
something on a non-blocking channel. if it works, ok, but if we can't send
because we are blocked then we will just send later.

in the case of NIOServerCnxn there really shouldn't be any exceptions in
sendResponse since it's just queuing. i think the catch is probably there
so that the exception does not get propagated up and kill everything.

ben

On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Patrick Hunt <phunt@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi Yuliya - my read is that sendResponse in NIOServerCnxn is logging,
> then dropping, any Exceptions encountered during sendResponse. In other
> words it's doing best effort response. Not sure if that is "correct", but
> that's what it's currently doing in NIO. Surprisingly it's also hiding any
> IOExceptions, which is part of the method signature as defined by
> ServerCnxn. Some of the calling code is trying to handle IOException in
> some cases which is odd... I suspect it was an oversight in ZOOKEEPER-597,
> but I'm not sure.
>
> Ben any insight?
>
> Patrick
>
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 5:15 PM, yuliya Feldman <
> yufeldman@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Hello there,
>> We have been extensively testing Netty connection versus NIIO and there
>> are some issues that show up I wanted to get community response on.
>> In the process of testing https://issues.apache.
>> org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2509 fix we identified that sendResponse()
>> method may try to do some operations after close() was invoked - as
>> channel.close() in Netty is asynch. and subsequently lead to some NPE.
>> NPE itself is not a good thing but the problems aggravates with the fact
>> that propagation of NPE will lead to main processing thread exiting and at
>> that point ZK server becomes unresponsive - since no requests will be
>> processed anymore.
>> In NIOServerCnxn.java in sendResponse() it is catching Exception and just
>> logs a warning  which was added as part of https://issues.apache.org/jira
>> /browse/ZOOKEEPER-597
>> I am trying to understand what a behavior should be in case of any
>> exception in sendResponse.
>> Any insight would be highly appreciated
>> Thanks,Yuliya
>>
>>
>

--94eb2c08bc7ecfd540053b6bbece--