Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27A9F200D3A for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 13:11:25 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 25E68160BF4; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 12:11:25 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 4490E160BEA for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 13:11:24 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 14779 invoked by uid 500); 15 Nov 2017 12:11:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@uima.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@uima.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@uima.apache.org Received: (qmail 14729 invoked by uid 99); 15 Nov 2017 12:11:23 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 12:11:23 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 490471A01E7 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 12:11:22 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.879 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.879 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd2-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yJGkyDjWRpw3 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 12:11:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-lf0-f41.google.com (mail-lf0-f41.google.com [209.85.215.41]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id D5F9B5FD92 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 12:11:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf0-f41.google.com with SMTP id a132so25980427lfa.7 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 04:11:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Lqmk+wWoANPijqrYCNrZ62APjycs1/O6vPEvFxNxVWk=; b=V61D2SNRAdYQohvh0OqqgpYIS4T5PBpc3WFL8ygWU7Sp5Ezp/Sb+w/TkamV+5xHE89 5gFoHKOeSrZzHy/xyK3sF2mRykFAulH6mD+6mhX03Q9UDA87IdfysJ8t1TPF+qXOuwJo MUq9GHLYNmKDjS4ARv7pN7Ula8i+QFeAvC9wkTnkooM7DVhwlmXijNxu24xk2uR6aFul QdTTE9NEtk4cXw9Po4O13r3Z2Sl3WePE44PdE1lcY7zqUbh0rbmdufIGU2j5svVXoeB1 0xwX7cFdoC+KU0Y5dgAe/6ADA4nLOcrIkJ5aVz/6x0Vjmlag+Y0IwCSSHPHDvNcEE9Rk FArg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=Lqmk+wWoANPijqrYCNrZ62APjycs1/O6vPEvFxNxVWk=; b=lV3ZBPfn6RyMq/pTF03eig2XwUe/XAj63IkXmKmFMeoAPXBBg9CJYj6h58dkUuSXHK K8mjx1DLa1eEQtEXCkD5mvnJqn3WkWIQ2VoeULi5gEn7w2ka4+Kr4D50EzHleBDmoxP7 Zv1sXpnoTxN3A1cmIXCTCEp7wXOqQrup557oQSzIYDurFE72zTR/MFU8iVKa7ASV50dd r97DpYJwo4EjhQYpZ2CngiF/LXglLYaO1h9C2pSOD3xgwcIUvfVzwTdoP6RATOGS/xqL NQ+sdoxUVr2zzss4vds3lmILyBOonJGoZ7CPDrGeVlmx4JWlQWhjQ5Z504DGVDKqBE/+ kaqQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX5PTeWfhePDtTqlaxXd4apxVUNMeJmdqtWcGfyKZ27jFzt/CcsB xkijPi6zWsbC8QeuhlMNrhwmtZ/2Z9ZLZzxubhU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMZUjJYJwZk6cz13sFdH96SPmHRo3990JWFzK/5IZ1k/ySB0o9HK5R+6GJi5pAjV7u+BabkQT7HAD9VPDT94Shc= X-Received: by 10.46.29.151 with SMTP id w23mr2359004lje.66.1510747877264; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 04:11:17 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.25.41.130 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 04:11:16 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5A0C1BD0.6000803@orkash.com> References: <5A042BA3.1080509@orkash.com> <5A0534EF.4020105@orkash.com> <5A092EBA.1020208@orkash.com> <5A0A7166.90004@orkash.com> <5A0BBBE6.8000702@orkash.com> <5A0C1BD0.6000803@orkash.com> From: Lou DeGenaro Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 07:11:16 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: DUCC's job goes into infintie loop To: user@uima.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c1aae9a91d371055e046658" archived-at: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 12:11:25 -0000 --94eb2c1aae9a91d371055e046658 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" I'm sorry, but it is still not clear to me. You need to give step by step instructions on precisely what you are doing and the events that occur so I can re-create the problem, and/or you need to supply DUCC daemons and user logs and say which Job or Service number is not behaving properly. The best advise is to upgrade to the latest version of DUCC and see if your problem still exists. Lou. On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 5:49 AM, priyank sharma wrote: > My complaint is that the job doesn't able to process any data as we gave > maximum 75 minutes for a job to process, after every 75 minutes a new job > starts it is having the same batch of ids as the previous job and this > behaviour of the job continues untill we restarts the DUCC. > > Last time when this happened, that time one of our machine out of three > was down and disconnected from the cluster. > > The machine which was down having all the UIMA-AS services deployed on it. > Uima-AS services are used to process the data. > > When the machine is down then uimaas services should allocate to the other > two machine, may be DUCC fails to allocate the uimaas services to the other > two machine due to which the job may not able to process data. > > The problem still is with the job but i am trying to explain you every > possible thing that happened to my cluster when the problem arise to make > it easy for you to help me. > > Are my problem clear to you now??? > > Thanks and Regards > Priyank Sharma > > On Wednesday 15 November 2017 03:57 PM, Lou DeGenaro wrote: > >> Please note that we make a clear distinction between "services" and >> "jobs". Earlier e-mail from you suggested that your trouble was related >> to >> jobs. >> >> Here is my understanding of you situation. You use ducc_submit to submit >> a >> job comprising several work items. DUCC starts three Job Processes all on >> the same machine and these are successfully processing work items. At >> some >> point before all work items are completed the connection to that machine >> is >> lost. And at this point the trouble for you begins...is this correct? >> >> DUCC should detect that the lost contact machine is down, and if there is >> space on other machine(s) it should allocate new Job Processes to continue >> the work. However, the disconnected machine may continue processing any >> work items is was working on prior to losing connectivity, so it is >> possible that the same work items may have overlapping processing. Is >> overlapping processing of the same work items your complaint? >> >> Lou. >> >> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:00 PM, priyank sharma < >> priyank.sharma@orkash.com> >> wrote: >> >> server down mean one out of three machine is disconnected from the cluster >>> of three and all the services were deployed on the machine which was >>> disconnect from the cluster. >>> >>> Thanks and Regards >>> Priyank Sharma >>> >>> On Tuesday 14 November 2017 04:08 PM, Lou DeGenaro wrote: >>> >>> What do you mean by "server down", precisely? Since we have no logs to >>>> look at we can only go by your descriptions. We're trying to help... >>>> >>>> Lou. >>>> >>>> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 11:30 PM, priyank sharma < >>>> priyank.sharma@orkash.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> When our job goes into infinite-loop that time uima analysis engine did >>>> >>>>> not start and one of the server out of three were down that server has >>>>> all >>>>> the service which is being used by the uima analysis engine. >>>>> >>>>> Is the server down creates this issue? >>>>> >>>>> is memory the problem? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks and Regards >>>>> Priyank Sharma >>>>> >>>>> On Monday 13 November 2017 07:38 PM, Eddie Epstein wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Several different issues here. There is no "job completion cap", rather >>>>> >>>>>> there is a limit on how long an individual work item will be allowed >>>>>> to >>>>>> process before it is labeled a timeout. The default number of such >>>>>> errors >>>>>> + >>>>>> exceptions before a Job is stopped is 15. Please increase this cap if >>>>>> you >>>>>> expect a work item to go longer. >>>>>> >>>>>> If a job process runs out of heap space it should go OOM at which >>>>>> point >>>>>> unpredictable things will happen. Do you see OOM exceptions in the JP >>>>>> logfiles? >>>>>> >>>>>> As for a bug, it is still hard to understand what is happening. Newer >>>>>> versions of DUCC include a ducc_gather_logs command that collects DUCC >>>>>> daemon logfiles and state and makes it more likely we can understand >>>>>> what >>>>>> is happening. No user application logfiles are included in the >>>>>> captured >>>>>> tar >>>>>> file. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Eddie >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 12:33 AM, priyank sharma < >>>>>> priyank.sharma@orkash.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, i am using DUCC v2.0.1 i have a three node cluster with 32gb ram, >>>>>> >>>>>> 40gb ram and 28gb ram. Job runs fine for 15-20 days after that it goes >>>>>>> into >>>>>>> the infinite loop with the same batch of the id's. We have a 75 >>>>>>> minutes >>>>>>> cap >>>>>>> for a job to complete if not then its start again so after every 75 >>>>>>> minutes >>>>>>> new job starts but with the same id batch as previous and not even a >>>>>>> single >>>>>>> document ingested in the data store it goes in the same state untill >>>>>>> we >>>>>>> restarts the server. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is this because of the DUCC v2.0.1, are this version of DUCC having >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> bug? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is this problem occur because of the Java Heap Space? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please suggest something as there are nothing in the logs regarding >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> my >>>>>>> problem. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks and Regards >>>>>>> Priyank Sharma >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Friday 10 November 2017 09:00 PM, Eddie Epstein wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Priyank, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Looks like you are running DUCC v2.0.x. There are so many bugs fixed >>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>> subsequent versions, the latest being v2.2.1. Newer versions have a >>>>>>>> ducc_update command that will upgrade an existing install, but given >>>>>>>> all >>>>>>>> the changes since v2.0.x I suggest a clean install. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Eddie >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 12:11 AM, priyank sharma < >>>>>>>> priyank.sharma@orkash.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is nothing on the work item page and performance page on the >>>>>>>> web >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> server. There is only one log file for the main node, no log files >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> other two nodes. Ducc job processes not able to pick the data from >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> data >>>>>>>>> source and no UIMA aggregator is working for that batches. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Are the issue because of the java heap space? We are giving 4gb ram >>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> job-process. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Attaching the Log file. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks and Regards >>>>>>>>> Priyank Sharma >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thursday 09 November 2017 04:33 PM, Lou DeGenaro wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The first place to look is in your job's logs. Visit the ducc-mon >>>>>>>>> jobs >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> page ducchost:42133/jobs.jsp then click on the id of your job. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Examine >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> logs by clicking on each log file name looking for any revealing >>>>>>>>>> information. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Feel free to post non-confidential snippets here, or If you'd like >>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>> chat >>>>>>>>>> in real time we can use hipchat. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Lou. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 5:19 AM, priyank sharma < >>>>>>>>>> priyank.sharma@orkash.com >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> All! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I have a problem regarding DUCC cluster in which a job process >>>>>>>>>> gets >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> stuck >>>>>>>>>>> and keeps on processing the same batch again and again due to >>>>>>>>>>> maximum >>>>>>>>>>> duration the batch gets reason or extraordinary status >>>>>>>>>>> *"**CanceledByUser" >>>>>>>>>>> *and then gets restarted with the same ID's. This usually happens >>>>>>>>>>> after >>>>>>>>>>> 15 >>>>>>>>>>> to 20 days and goes away after restarting the ducc cluster. While >>>>>>>>>>> going >>>>>>>>>>> through the data store that is being used by CAS consumer to >>>>>>>>>>> ingest >>>>>>>>>>> data, >>>>>>>>>>> the data regarding this batch does never get ingested. So most >>>>>>>>>>> probably >>>>>>>>>>> this data is not being processed. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> How to check if this data is being processed or not? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Are the resources the issue and why it is being processed after >>>>>>>>>>> restarting >>>>>>>>>>> the cluster? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> We have three nodes cluster with 32gb ram, 40gb ram and 28 gb >>>>>>>>>>> ram. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks and Regards >>>>>>>>>>> Priyank Sharma >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> > --94eb2c1aae9a91d371055e046658--