Support Questions

Find answers, ask questions, and share your expertise

Why i am keep on getting connection reset warning in zookeeper log and its showing in storm log also?

New Contributor

zookeeper log:

WARN [/0.0.0.0:3888:QuorumCnxManager@274] - Exception reading or writing challenge: java.net.SocketException: Connection reset 2016-07-14 07:27:24,266 [myid:1] - INFO [NIOServerCxn.Factory:0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0:2181:NIOServerCnxnFactory@192] - Accepted socket connection from /40.86.112.11:1336 2016-07-14 07:27:24,457 [myid:1] - WARN [NIOServerCxn.Factory:0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0:2181:NIOServerCnxn@362] - Exception causing close of session 0x0 due to java.io.IOException: Connection reset

java.net.SocketException: Connection reset

at java.net.SocketInputStream.read(SocketInputStream.java:209) at java.net.SocketInputStream.read(SocketInputStream.java:141) at java.io.BufferedInputStream.fill(BufferedInputStream.java:246) at java.io.BufferedInputStream.read(BufferedInputStream.java:265) at java.io.DataInputStream.readInt(DataInputStream.java:387) at org.apache.jute.BinaryInputArchive.readInt(BinaryInputArchive.java:63) at org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.QuorumPacket.deserialize(QuorumPacket.java:83) at org.apache.jute.BinaryInputArchive.readRecord(BinaryInputArchive.java:99) at org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.LearnerHandler.run(LearnerHandler.java:308)

storm nimbus log

java.io.IOException: Connection reset by peer

at sun.nio.ch.FileDispatcherImpl.read0(Native Method) at sun.nio.ch.SocketDispatcher.read(SocketDispatcher.java:39) at sun.nio.ch.IOUtil.readIntoNativeBuffer(IOUtil.java:223) at sun.nio.ch.IOUtil.read(IOUtil.java:197) at sun.nio.ch.SocketChannelImpl.read(SocketChannelImpl.java:380) at org.apache.storm.thrift.transport.TNonblockingSocket.read(TNonblockingSocket.java:142) at org.apache.storm.thrift.server.AbstractNonblockingServer$FrameBuffer.internalRead(AbstractNonblockingServer.java:539) at org.apache.storm.thrift.server.AbstractNonblockingServer$FrameBuffer.read(AbstractNonblockingServer.java:338) at org.apache.storm.thrift.server.AbstractNonblockingServer$AbstractSelectThread.handleRead(AbstractNonblockingServer.java:203) at org.apache.storm.thrift.server.TNonblockingServer$SelectAcceptThread.select(TNonblockingServer.java:203) at org.apache.storm.thrift.server.TNonblockingServer$SelectAcceptThread.run(TNonblockingServer.java:154) 2016-07-15 04:18:26.065 o.a.s.t.s.AbstractNonblockingServer$FrameBuffer [WARN] Got an IOException in internalRead!

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

@sidharth mishra

This is just a WARN and it is kind of expected by design.

org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.QuorumCnxManager class implements a connection manager for leader election using TCP. It maintains one connection for every pair of servers. The tricky part is to guarantee that there is exactly one connection for every pair of servers that are operating correctly and that can communicate over the network. If two servers try to start a connection concurrently, then the connection manager uses a very simple tie-breaking mechanism to decide which connection to drop based on the IP addressed of the two parties. For every peer, the manager maintains a queue of messages to send. If the connection to any particular peer drops, then the sender thread puts the message back on the list. As this implementation currently uses a queue implementation to maintain messages to send to another peer, we add the message to the tail of the queue, thus changing the order of messages. Although this is not a problem for the leader election, it could be a problem when consolidating peer communication.

If this response clarifies it, vote/accept it as the answer.

View solution in original post

1 REPLY 1

@sidharth mishra

This is just a WARN and it is kind of expected by design.

org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.QuorumCnxManager class implements a connection manager for leader election using TCP. It maintains one connection for every pair of servers. The tricky part is to guarantee that there is exactly one connection for every pair of servers that are operating correctly and that can communicate over the network. If two servers try to start a connection concurrently, then the connection manager uses a very simple tie-breaking mechanism to decide which connection to drop based on the IP addressed of the two parties. For every peer, the manager maintains a queue of messages to send. If the connection to any particular peer drops, then the sender thread puts the message back on the list. As this implementation currently uses a queue implementation to maintain messages to send to another peer, we add the message to the tail of the queue, thus changing the order of messages. Although this is not a problem for the leader election, it could be a problem when consolidating peer communication.

If this response clarifies it, vote/accept it as the answer.

Take a Tour of the Community
Don't have an account?
Your experience may be limited. Sign in to explore more.