Logging FileHandler: static locks and hardcoded maximum number

[Daniel Fuchs]

Hi,

On 19/02/15 16:30, Behrooz Nobakht wrote:
> I'd be very happy to introduce an issue. But,
> I've always failed to be able to create an account on
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/secure/Dashboard.jspa
> so, for me, the starting point is where I should do this?!

If you are not an OpenJDK member then I guess you should
use http://bugs.java.com/ - and at some point this issue will
be transferred to https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/
where it (hopefully) will come in my inbox :-)

You might want to refer to this email thread in your issue
description.
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-February/031624.html


best regards,

-- daniel

>
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Daniel Fuchs <daniel.fuchs at oracle.com
> <mailto:daniel.fuchs at oracle.com>> wrote:
>
>     Thanks Behrooz.
>
>     Could you log an issue for this then?
>     If you can attach a small reproducer it will be helpful.
>
>     There are a bunch of unit tests in the JDK that verify
>     that FileHandler .lck files are correctly deleted - but
>     these tests are all mono-process. I would like to make
>     sure to chase down the real issue - so a small isolated
>     reproducer would definitely help.
>
>     best regards,
>
>     -- daniel
>
>
>     On 19/02/15 15:29, Behrooz Nobakht wrote:
>
>         Hi Daniel,
>
>         Thanks for referring to this ticket.
>         Here is what I did.
>
>         My Java version:
>
>         java version "1.8.0_40-ea"
>         Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_40-ea-b21)
>         Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.40-b24, mixed mode)
>
>         So, to make this more observable.
>         The p1 process invokes a command with p2: start and stop.
>         So, with 50 pairs of start and stop, we should be able to see the
>         problem again.
>
>         I ran a script that invokes start from p1, gets the status of
>         p2, stops
>         p2 and confirms its status again.
>         Here's the output from run 49:
>
>         ===
>         run 49
>         Invoking Start
>         RUNNING
>         Invoking Stop
>         STOPPED
>         run 49 - Done
>         run 50
>         Invoking Start
>         RUNNING
>         Invoking Stop
>         STOPPED
>         run 50 - Done
>         run 51
>         Invoking Start
>         RUNNING
>         Invoking Stop
>         RUNNING
>         run 51 - Done
>         run 52
>         Invoking Start
>         STOPPED
>         Invoking Stop
>         STOPPED
>         run 52 - Done
>         run 53
>         Invoking Start
>         STOPPED
>         Invoking Stop
>         STOPPED
>         run 53 - Done
>         run 54
>         Invoking Start
>         STOPPED
>         Invoking Stop
>         STOPPED
>         run 54 - Done
>         ===
>
>         As the above shows, starting run 51, the expected status is
>         violated.
>         And, here is what I get a lsof of the log directory on the
>         application:
>
>         ===
>         -rw-rw-r-- 1 appuser appuser    0 Feb 19 15:19
>         app.stdouterr.100.0.log.lck
>         -rw-rw-r-- 1 appuser appuser 3.0K Feb 19 15:19
>         app.stdouterr.100.0.log
>         -rw-rw-r-- 1 appuser appuser    0 Feb 19 15:16
>         app.stdouterr.0.0.log.lck
>         -rw-rw-r-- 1 appuser appuser  366 Feb 19 15:16 app.stdouterr.0.0.log
>         ===
>
>         Thanks for your time on this,
>         Behrooz
>
>
>
>
>
>         On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Daniel Fuchs
>         <daniel.fuchs at oracle.com <mailto:daniel.fuchs at oracle.com>
>         <mailto:daniel.fuchs at oracle.__com
>         <mailto:daniel.fuchs at oracle.com>>> wrote:
>
>              Hi Behrooz,
>
>              On 19/02/15 13:46, Behrooz Nobakht wrote:
>
>                  The version of Java is irrelevant. We have tested our setup
>                  on Java 7 and Java 8 u25/31. We observe the same exception.
>
>
>              Ok - then the version is indeed relevant ;-)
>
>              What you are observing may be a symptom of
>         https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/____browse/JDK-8048020
>         <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/__browse/JDK-8048020>
>              <https://bugs.openjdk.java.__net/browse/JDK-8048020
>         <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048020>>
>              which was fixed in 8u40 build 6.
>
>              If you would like to verify that this bug is indeed
>              what is causing your issue, you may want to try out
>              your setup with an early access build of 8u40, and
>              see if the problem disappears.
>
>              Early access of 8u40 may be downloaded from there:
>         https://jdk8.java.net/____download.html
>         <https://jdk8.java.net/__download.html>
>              <https://jdk8.java.net/__download.html
>         <https://jdk8.java.net/download.html>>
>
>
>              best regards,
>
>              -- daniel
>
>
>
>
>         --
>         -- Behrooz Nobakht
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> -- Behrooz Nobakht