> From: Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> > Sent: Wednesday, November 4, 2020 11:39 AM > To: users@tomcat.apache.org > Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever? > > On 03/11/2020 15:05, Eric Robinson wrote: > >> From: Eric Robinson <eric.robin...@psmnv.com> > >>> From: Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> > > <snip/> > > >>> Progress. The first attempt to write to the socket triggers the > >>> following > >>> exception: > >>> > >>> 02-Nov-2020 14:33:54.083 FINE [http-bio-3016-exec-13] > >>> org.apache.tomcat.util.net.JIoEndpoint$DebugOutputStream.write > >>> [301361476] > >>> java.net.SocketException: Bad file descriptor (Write failed) > > <snip/> > > >>> 1. OS running out of file descriptors. > >>> > >>> 2.Trying to use a closed socket. > >>> > >>> I want to review the source code to see if there are any others. > > There is an option 3 - a JVM bug. There were bugs in this area back in the > 1.2/1.3/1.4 days. It seems unlikely that such a bug resurfaced now - > especially > given that the issue happens with NIO as well as BIO. > > >>> I don't think we are seeing 2 as there is no indication of the > >>> Socket, InputStream or OutputStream being closed in the logs. > >>> > >>> That leaves 1. Possible causes here are a file descriptor leak or > >>> normal operations occasionally needing more than the current limit. > >>> I don't think it is a leak as I'd expect to see many more errors of > >>> this type after the first and we aren't seeing that. That leaves the > >>> possibility of the current limit being a little too low. > >>> > >>> My recommendation at this point is to increase the limit for file > descriptors. > >>> Meanwhile, I'll look at the JRE source to see if there are any other > >>> possible triggers for this exception. > > <snip/> > > > Wait, never mind. I realized the per-process limits are what matters. I > checked, and nofile was set to 4096 for the relevant java process. > > > > I did... > > > > # prlimit --pid 8730 --nofile=16384:16384 > > > > That should give java some extra breathing room if the issue is max open > files, right? > > I'm not the person to ask that question. Linux administration is not an area > I'd > consider myself sufficiently knowledgeable to give a definitive answer. It > looks OK based on some quick searching. > > How have things been with the higher limit? More issues, fewer issues, > about the same? Or maybe even no issues (he asks hopefully)? > > Mark >
Not enough data collected to know yet. We did see at least one instance of the error, but I'll know better tomorrow. Disclaimer : This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for intended recipients. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and might not represent those of Physician Select Management. Warning: Although Physician Select Management has taken reasonable precautions to ensure no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage arising from the use of this email or attachments. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
