We are running JMeter for connecting TCP Socket thorugh BinaryTCPClientImpl , We are getting the response code : 500
Response message: org.apache.jmeter.protocol.tcp.sampler.ReadException
JMeter Version : 2.9
Help out
If this is the error
ERROR - jmeter.protocol.tcp.sampler.TCPSampler: org.apache.jmeter.protocol.tcp.sampler.ReadException:
at org.apache.jmeter.protocol.tcp.sampler.BinaryTCPClientImpl.read(BinaryTCPClientImpl.java:140)
at org.apache.jmeter.protocol.tcp.sampler.TCPSampler.sample(TCPSampler.java:414)
at org.apache.jmeter.threads.JMeterThread.process_sampler(JMeterThread.java:429)
at org.apache.jmeter.threads.JMeterThread.run(JMeterThread.java:257)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
then you have 2 options. The first (and much easier if it applies
to you) is to use the LengthPrefixedBinaryTCPClientImpl. If this
applies to you, that is, if your responses are always the same fixed
sizes, you can simply set the tcp.binarylength.prefix.length property
and go about your business.
If that is not the case, then your other option is to extend
org.apache.jmeter.protocol.tcp.sampler.TCPClient. It may help to get in
touch with the client team of this proprietary protocol, because after
all, they have implemented something that works. You'll probably have
to extend it to look something like LengthPrefixedBinaryTCPClientImpl
read N bytes. Although, this runs the risks of reading too many or too
few bytes. If your application server ever miscalculates the size of
it's output, you suffer the consequences by getting another timeout or
leaving extra bytes in the buffer and reading them on the next iteration
(and then cascading errors).
Related
I'm trying to track down a stall that may or may not be on the client host, but on the server side. Unfortunately this is all kernel RPC level, with some of if not controlled by my code...
I'm something of a neophyte when it comes to rpc debugging, so any references would be helpful.
I have this output in dmesg when rpcdebug -c -m all is run:
[2109401.599881] -pid- flgs status -client- --rqstp- -timeout ---ops--
[2109401.600055] 51580 0880 0 ffff9af4c4da9800 ffff9af4c4416600 15000 ffffffffc0b26680 nfsv3 GETATTR a:call_status [sunrpc] q:xprt_pending
[2109401.600300] 51581 0880 0 ffff9af4c4da9800 ffff9af42465f800 15000 ffffffffc0b26680 nfsv3 GETATTR a:call_status [sunrpc] q:xprt_pending
I get the PID, flags, and timeout, but:
What are the "client" and "rqstp" fields supposed to mean? If I see either duplicated in subsequent outputs, does that mean the RPC is stalled? And which way?
Is "xprt_pending" a "waiting to send the RPC" queue? If that queue was "delayq," I would know what that means in the context of the problem we're trying to diagnose. But this state doesn't seem to be explained anywhere I find in Google. (And my Google-Fu is usually better than this...)
What is the "ffffffffc0b26680" supposed to be? It repeats all over the output, for EVERY RPC listed.
I'm trying to avoid running with rpcdebug set, because I'm dealing with an intermittent stall, and I'd rather not slow EVERYTHING down in the hopes of catching the stall.
What would make a write call to a TCPSocket hang indefinitely?
lotsOfBytes = # a really large number of bytes, like 1 or 2 MB of data
socket = TCPSocket.new # some config
socket.write(lotsOfBytes) # this line hangs
I am trying to debug an issue where a get_multi operation sent to memcached with a large number of keys hangs indefinitely, and it does so on a line that resembles that code snippet. I'm trying to better understand how the low-level sockets on which this library is built are expected to work.
What are the values of following attributes on your TCPSocket:
Keep-alive activated and what value is set?
Timeout set and what value is set?
If you will do a Wireshark dump, it's much better so see what happens before hanging connection.
tcpdump? are there any attempts to send anything?
netstat - for see output queue.
does it work on a small number of bytes in your environment?
I have an EA set in place that loops history trades and builds one large string with trade information. I then send this string every second from MT4 to the python backend using a plain PUSH/PULL pattern.
For whatever reason, the data isn't received on the pull side when the string transferred becomes too long. The backend PULL-socket slices each string and further processes it.
Any chance that the PULL-side is too slow to grab and process all the data which then causes an overflow (so that a delay arises due to the processing part)?
Talking about file sizes we are well below 5kb per second.
This is the PULL-socket, which manipulates the data after receiving it:
while True:
# check 24/7 for available data in the pull socket
try:
msg = zmq_socket.recv_string()
data = msg.split("|")
print(data)
# if data is available and msg is account info, handle as follows
if data[0] == "account_info":
[...]
except zmq.error.Again:
print("\nResource timeout.. please try again.")
sleep(0.000001)
I am a bit curious now since the pull socket seems to not even be able to process a string containing 40 trades with their according information on a single MT4 client - Python connection. I actually planned to set it up to handle more than 5.000 MT4 clients - python backend connections at once.
Q : Any chance that the pull side is too slow to grab and process all the data which then causes an overflow (so that a delay arises due to the processing part)?
Zero chance.
Sending 640 B each second is definitely no showstopper ( 5kb per second - is nowhere near a performance ceiling... )
The posted problem formulation is otherwise undecidable.
Step 1) POSACK/NACK prove whether a PUSH side accepts the payload for sending error-free.
Step 2) prove the PULL side is not to be blamed - [PUSH.send(640*chr(64+i)) for i in range( 10 )] via a python-2-python tcp://-transport-class solo-channel crossing host-to-host hop, over at least your local physical network ( no VMCI/emulated vLAN, no other localhost colocation )
Step 3) if either steps above got POSACK-ed, your next chances are the ZeroMQ configuration space and/or the MT4-based PUSH-side incompatibility, most probably "hidden" inside a (not mentioned) third party ZeroMQ wrapper used / first-party issues with string handling / processing ( which you must have already read about, as it has been so many times observed and mentioned in the past posts about this trouble with well "hidden" MQL4 internal eco-system changes ).
Anyway, stay tuned. ZeroMQ is a sure bet and a truly horsepower for professional and low-latency designs in distributed-system's domain.
I'm trying to read a lot of bulk data (probably around 1-2G) into neo4j with a simple ruby script and Neography. My code mostly just consists of a lot of create_node and create_relationship methods.
It seems to work fine, but after around 5,000 create methods I reach an error:
/home/earlz/.gem/ruby/2.1.0/gems/excon-0.44.3/lib/excon/socket.rb:127:in `connect_nonblock': Cannot assign requested address - connect(2) for 127.0.0.1:7474 (Errno::EADDRNOTAVAIL) (Excon::Errors::SocketError)
How do I fix this? I've tried increasing the HTTP timeouts and such, but this didn't help anything
It seems like your script is opening so many connections that it ran out of ephemeral ports to pick from. Try this:
echo "32768 61000" >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_local_port_range
I have installed FastRWeb 1.1-0 on an installation of R 2.15.2 (Trick or Treat) running on an Ubuntu 10.04 box. I hope to use the resulting system to run a web service.
I've configured the system by setting http.port to 8181 in rserve.conf and unsetting the socket destination. I've assigned .http.request to FastRWeb::.http.request. I exchange JSON blobs between the client and the server using HTTP POST (the second blob can exceed 150KB in size, and will not fit in an HTTP GET query string.)
Everything works end to end -- I have a little client-side R script which generates JSON RPC calls across the channel. I see the run function invoked, and see it returned.
I've run into a significant performance problem, however: the return path takes in excess of 12 seconds from the time run() returns (including the call to done()) and the time that the R client gets the return value. RCurl doesn't seem to be the culprit; it appears that something is taking twelve seconds to do a return.
Does anybody have any suggestions of where to look? I can easily shift over to using Apache 2.0 and CGI, but, honestly, I'd rather keep everything R centric.
Answering my own question.
I wrapped .http.request with an Rprof()/Rprof(NULL) pair and looked at the time spent in each routine. It turns out that the system spends ~11 seconds inside URLDecode in the standard implementation of .run. This looks like a scaling problem in URLDecode in the core.