The exception itself is a bug (I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-2767 to fix it).
However, the important message is the previous one (Even if the exception was not thrown, repair wouldn't be able to work correctly, so the fact that the exception is thrown is not such a big deal). Apparently, from the standpoint of whomever node this logs is from, the node 10.128.34.18 is still running 0.7. You should check if it is the case (restarting 10.128.34.18 and look for something like 'Cassandra version: 0.8.0' is one solution). If the does does run 0.8.0 and you still get this error, then it would point to a problem with our detection of the nodes. -- Sylvain On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Sasha Dolgy <sdo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi ... > > Does anyone else see these type of INFO messages in their log files, > or is i just me..? > > INFO [manual-repair-1c6b33bc-ef14-4ec8-94f6-f1464ec8bdec] 2011-06-13 > 21:28:39,877 AntiEntropyService.java (line 177) Excluding > /10.128.34.18 from repair because it is on version 0.7 or sooner. You > should consider updating this node before running repair again. > ERROR [manual-repair-1c6b33bc-ef14-4ec8-94f6-f1464ec8bdec] 2011-06-13 > 21:28:39,877 AbstractCassandraDaemon.java (line 113) Fatal exception > in thread Thread[manual-repair-1c6b33bc-ef14-4ec8-94f6-f1464ec8bdec,5,RMI > Runtime] > java.util.ConcurrentModificationException > at java.util.HashMap$HashIterator.nextEntry(HashMap.java:793) > at java.util.HashMap$KeyIterator.next(HashMap.java:828) > at > org.apache.cassandra.service.AntiEntropyService.getNeighbors(AntiEntropyService.java:173) > at > org.apache.cassandra.service.AntiEntropyService$RepairSession.run(AntiEntropyService.java:776) > > I'm at a loss as to why this is showing up in the logs. > -sd > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 3:58 PM, Sasha Dolgy <sdo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> hm. that's not it. we've been using a non-standard jmx port for some >> time.... >> >> i've dropped the keyspace and recreated ... >> >> wonder if that'll help >> >> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 3:57 PM, Tyler Hobbs <ty...@datastax.com> wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 8:41 AM, Sasha Dolgy <sdo...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> I recall there being a discussion about a default port changing from >>>> 0.7.x to 0.8.x ...this was JMX, correct? Or were there others. >>> >>> Yes, the default JMX port changed from 8080 to 7199. I don't think there >>> were any others. >
