Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Message from discussion phantom ports in erlang:ports()
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Tim Watson  
View profile  
 More options Nov 16 2012, 5:25 am
From: Tim Watson <watson.timo...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 10:25:44 +0000
Local: Fri, Nov 16 2012 5:25 am
Subject: Re: [erlang-questions] phantom ports in erlang:ports()
I can't get to the issue tracker right this moment, but these sockets are stuck in CLOSE_WAIT for a long time. The customer reports normally having circa 80±20 live connections, most of them listeners that do not close the sockets. Under normal conditions, there are no CLOSE_WAIT sockets showing up at all.

The customer also reports that even when the CLOSE_WAIT connections drop off that no further connections can be established, and we see some rather delightful errors coming back from these 'phantom' ports:

 {inet_async,#Port<0.5808>,25398,{error,system_limit}}

but the system limits are *not* reached by any stretch of the imagination:

{file_descriptors,
[{total_limit,924},
{total_used,126},
{sockets_limit,829},
{sockets_used,56}]},
{processes,[{limit,1048576},{used,693}]}...

So this is more than just sockets stuck in CLOSE_WAIT by the looks of things.

On 16 Nov 2012, at 09:40, Valentin Micic wrote:

> I guess, a more interesting questions is weather or not sockets in this state may be seen as "phantom" ports?

> V/

> On 16 Nov 2012, at 11:32 AM, Jesper Louis Andersen wrote:

>> On Nov 16, 2012, at 7:29 AM, Valentin Micic <valen...@pixie.co.za> wrote:

>>> I am wondering if this may be attributed to CLOSE_WAIT/TIME_WAIT states sockets may be in during the connection shutdown?
>>> By the some token, if the server in question has a higher frequency of short-lived connections,  this may also explain discrepancy between number of file descriptors as reported by lsof and number of active ports reported by emulator.

>> TIME_WAIT is not a problem. It is just the kernel keeping track of the connection if packets get sent still by the other end. CLOSE_WAIT on the other hand sounds bad. This state should happen when the other end has sent a FIN and started to close down the socket, but the application (i.e., Erlang?) has not closed the socket down yet.

>> If you have lingering CLOSE_WAITs that are there for a long time it is usually a warning sign that something may be bad.

>> Jesper Louis Andersen
>> Erlang Solutions Ltd., Copenhagen

>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> erlang-questi...@erlang.org
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questi...@erlang.org
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
erlang-questi...@erlang.org
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.