lock.destroy() RuntimeInterruptedException

[Duke]

Any one seen this problem when calling destroy() to clean up the lock?
Should we be calling destroy() or is there a better way?

Thanks
Duke
---

2011-08-05 14:26:28,049 WARN [pool-4-thread-45] (ExecutorTask.java:
320) -
java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
at
sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:
39)
at
sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:
25)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:597)
at com.resolve.thread.ExecutorTask.execute(ExecutorTask.java:
316)
at com.resolve.thread.ExecutorTask.call(ExecutorTask.java:139)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask
$Sync.innerRun(FutureTask.java:303)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:138)
at com.resolve.thread.ExecutorScheduledThreadPool
$ScheduledFutureTask.access$2(ExecutorScheduledThreadPool.java:1)
at com.resolve.thread.ExecutorScheduledThreadPool
$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ExecutorScheduledThreadPool.java:301)
at com.resolve.thread.ThreadPoolExecutor
$Worker.runTask(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:901)
at com.resolve.thread.ThreadPoolExecutor
$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:923)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:619)
Caused by: com.hazelcast.impl.base.RuntimeInterruptedException
at com.hazelcast.impl.BaseManager
$ResponseQueueCall.handleInterruptedException(BaseManager.java:452)
at com.hazelcast.impl.BaseManager
$ResponseQueueCall.waitAndGetResult(BaseManager.java:443)
at com.hazelcast.impl.BaseManager
$ResponseQueueCall.getRedoAwareResult(BaseManager.java:463)
at com.hazelcast.impl.BaseManager
$ResponseQueueCall.getResult(BaseManager.java:458)
at com.hazelcast.impl.BaseManager
$RequestBasedCall.getResultAsObject(BaseManager.java:341)
at com.hazelcast.impl.BaseManager
$ResponseQueueCall.getResultAsObject(BaseManager.java:413)
at com.hazelcast.impl.BaseManager
$RequestBasedCall.getResultAsObject(BaseManager.java:337)
at com.hazelcast.impl.BaseManager
$ResponseQueueCall.getResultAsObject(BaseManager.java:413)
at com.hazelcast.impl.BaseManager
$RequestBasedCall.objectCall(BaseManager.java:368)
at com.hazelcast.impl.BaseManager
$ResponseQueueCall.objectCall(BaseManager.java:413)
at com.hazelcast.impl.BaseManager
$RequestBasedCall.objectCall(BaseManager.java:374)
at com.hazelcast.impl.BaseManager
$ResponseQueueCall.objectCall(BaseManager.java:413)
at com.hazelcast.impl.ConcurrentMapManager
$MRemove.txnalRemove(ConcurrentMapManager.java:664)
at com.hazelcast.impl.ConcurrentMapManager
$MRemove.remove(ConcurrentMapManager.java:626)
at com.hazelcast.impl.FactoryImpl$MProxyImpl
$MProxyReal.remove(FactoryImpl.java:2408)
at com.hazelcast.impl.FactoryImpl
$MProxyImpl.remove(FactoryImpl.java:2019)
at
com.hazelcast.impl.FactoryImpl.destroyInstanceClusterWide(FactoryImpl.java:
810)
at com.hazelcast.impl.FactoryImpl$LockProxy
$LockProxyBase.destroy(FactoryImpl.java:770)
at com.hazelcast.impl.FactoryImpl
$LockProxy.destroy(FactoryImpl.java:733)
at com.resolve.rscontrol.MAction.abortProcess(MAction.java:
544)
... 13 more

[Talip Ozturk]

Can you tell me Hazelcast build-date? Are you able to easily reproduce it?

http://twitter.com/oztalip

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hazelcast" group.
> To post to this group, send email to haze...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hazelcast+...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hazelcast?hl=en.
>
>

[Duke]

It's 1.9.1.

We can reproduce fairly consistently but we run through our regression
tests. I'll try switching to 1.9.2 and see if the issue is still
there.

Duke

[Fuad Malikov]

Hi Duke,

Why don't you try 1.9.3 instead?

Fuad

--
Fuad Malikov
+90.538.378.9777
http://twitter.com/fuadm

[Duke]

We had issues with the 1.9.3 earlier when we briefly ran it through
our tests and decided to stick with 1.9.1, but we'll have another
attempt as soon as our release gets out the door.

Duke

On Aug 11, 4:35 am, Fuad Malikov <f...@hazelcast.com> wrote:
> Hi Duke,
>
> Why don't you try 1.9.3 instead?
>
> Fuad
>
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 6:33 PM, Duke

> <duke.tantipra...@generationetech.com>wrote:

[Talip Ozturk]

Make sure you try 1.9.3.4 of 1.9.3 branch. Also try 1.9.4-RC as it
will be soon final!

http://twitter.com/oztalip