TU summary: 0 TRANSPORT 0 TRANSACTION 0 CLIENTTX 1998 SERVERTX 10690 TIMERS 0
Transaction summary: reqi 1225266 reqo 1200525 rspi 955555 rspo 1229993
Details: INVi 383069/S322324/F36145 INVo 344348/S322414/F0 ACKi 312462 ACKo 3223
60 BYEi 507150/S507141/F0 BYEo 307875/S307111/F0 CANi 22517/S507141/F0 CANo 2223
/S1550/F593 MSGi 0/S0/F0 MSGo 0/S0/F0 OPTi 0/S0/F0 OPTo 0/S0/F0 REGi 68/S64/F0 R
EGo 0/S0/F0 PUBi 0/S0/F0 PUBo 0/S0/F0 SUBi 0/S0/F0 SUBo 0/S0/F0 NOTi 0/S0/F0 NOT
o 0/S0/F0
Ok, the CLIENTTX and SERVERTX fields in the above logging statement indicate that there are lots and lots of TransactionStates lying around. Further, there are no timers left in the TimerQueue, so we aren't likely to clean any of these up. Lets talk about the server transactions first. There are a couple of likely possibilities:
1. The TU is failing to respond to some of the requests that the stack passes it; the stack will wait indefinitely for a response from the TU. It is the TU's responsibility to respond to EVERY request that is passed to it, no matter how malformed the request might be. The TU should never elect to "quietly" drop a request. Doing so is guaranteed to leak exactly one server TransactionState.
2. High load conditions (note the number of retransmissions) have caused the stack to leak transactions (I will take a closer look at this)
As for the client TransactionStates, this worries me more. There are fewer things that the TU can do wrong that will cause the stack to leak client TransactionStates. I will try to figure out what might be happening here.
So, are you using your own TU? If so, try putting a simple counter that gets incremented for each request that comes from the stack (excepting ACKs), and decremented for every final response sent to the stack. If this counter ends up being non-zero, you have a bug in your TU.
Best regards, Byron Campen
On Sep 21, 2006, at 1:36 PM, FrankYuan wrote: After call generator stopped for 10 minutes, I found that the resip statistics did not have any problem on these FIFO queues.
So I created core file and print the size of Transaction map.
There are still lot of TIDs in the transaction map. At least it is part of culprit to hold memory.
Should there be a grarbage collection to free these lost TIDs?
Here are the log files:
20060921-125408.091 | TuSelector.cxx:71 | Stats message
20060921-125408.091 | StatisticsMessage.cxx:153 | RESIP:TRANSACTION
TU summary: 0 TRANSPORT 0 TRANSACTION 0 CLIENTTX 1998 SERVERTX 10690 TIMERS 0
Transaction summary: reqi 1225266 reqo 1200525 rspi 955555 rspo 1229993
Details: INVi 383069/S322324/F36145 INVo 344348/S322414/F0 ACKi 312462 ACKo 3223
60 BYEi 507150/S507141/F0 BYEo 307875/S307111/F0 CANi 22517/S507141/F0 CANo 2223
/S1550/F593 MSGi 0/S0/F0 MSGo 0/S0/F0 OPTi 0/S0/F0 OPTo 0/S0/F0 REGi 68/S64/F0 R
EGo 0/S0/F0 PUBi 0/S0/F0 PUBo 0/S0/F0 SUBi 0/S0/F0 SUBo 0/S0/F0 NOTi 0/S0/F0 NOT
o 0/S0/F0
Retransmissions: INVx 116463 BYEx 105757 CANx 1499 MSGx 0 OPTx 0 REGx 0 finx 0 n
onx 0 PUBx 0 SUBx 0 NOTx 0
20060921-125708.084 | TuSelector.cxx:71 | Stats message
20060921-125708.084 | StatisticsMessage.cxx:153 | RESIP:TRANSACTION
TU summary: 0 TRANSPORT 0 TRANSACTION 0 CLIENTTX 1998 SERVERTX 10690 TIMERS 0
Transaction summary: reqi 1225268 reqo 1200525 rspi 955555 rspo 1229995
Details: INVi 383069/S322324/F36145 INVo 344348/S322414/F0 ACKi 312462 ACKo 3223
60 BYEi 507150/S507141/F0 BYEo 307875/S307111/F0 CANi 22517/S507141/F0 CANo 2223
/S1550/F593 MSGi 0/S0/F0 MSGo 0/S0/F0 OPTi 0/S0/F0 OPTo 0/S0/F0 REGi 70/S66/F0 R
EGo 0/S0/F0 PUBi 0/S0/F0 PUBo 0/S0/F0 SUBi 0/S0/F0 SUBo 0/S0/F0 NOTi 0/S0/F0 NOT
o 0/S0/F0
Retransmissions: INVx 116463 BYEx 105757 CANx 1499 MSGx 0 OPTx 0 REGx 0 finx 0 n
onx 0 PUBx 0 SUBx 0 NOTx 0
20060921-130008.078 | TuSelector.cxx:71 | Stats message
20060921-130008.085 | StatisticsMessage.cxx:153 | RESIP:TRANSACTION
TU summary: 0 TRANSPORT 0 TRANSACTION 0 CLIENTTX 1998 SERVERTX 10690 TIMERS 0
Transaction summary: reqi 1225270 reqo 1200525 rspi 955555 rspo 1229997
Details: INVi 383069/S322324/F36145 INVo 344348/S322414/F0 ACKi 312462 ACKo 3223
60 BYEi 507150/S507141/F0 BYEo 307875/S307111/F0 CANi 22517/S507141/F0 CANo 2223
/S1550/F593 MSGi 0/S0/F0 MSGo 0/S0/F0 OPTi 0/S0/F0 OPTo 0/S0/F0 REGi 72/S68/F0 R
EGo 0/S0/F0 PUBi 0/S0/F0 PUBo 0/S0/F0 SUBi 0/S0/F0 SUBo 0/S0/F0 NOTi 0/S0/F0 NOT
o 0/S0/F0
Retransmissions: INVx 116463 BYEx 105757 CANx 1499 MSGx 0 OPTx 0 REGx 0 finx 0 n
onx 0 PUBx 0 SUBx 0 NOTx 0
(gdb) p (EnSipStack->myStack->mTransactionController->mClientTransactionMap)
warning: can't find class named `resip::SipStack', as given by C++ RTTI
$1 = {mMap = {_M_ht = {_M_node_allocator = {<No data fields>},
_M_hash = {<No data fields>},
_M_equals = {<binary_function<resip::Data,resip::Data,bool>> = {<No data f
ields>}, <No data fields>},
_M_get_key = {<unary_function<std::pair<const resip::Data, resip::Transact
ionState*>,const resip::Data>> = {<No data fields>}, <No data fields>},
_M_buckets = {<_Vector_base<__gnu_cxx::_Hashtable_node<std::pair<const res
ip::Data, resip::TransactionState*> >*,std::allocator<resip::TransactionState*>
>> = {<_Vector_alloc_base<__gnu_cxx::_Hashtable_node<std::pair<const resip::Data
, resip::TransactionState*> >*,std::allocator<resip::TransactionState*>,true>> =
{_M_start = 0x920bdd10, _M_finish = 0x920c9d14,
_M_end_of_storage = 0x920c9d14}, <No data fields>}, <No data fields>
}, _M_num_elements = 1998}}}
(gdb) p (EnSipStack->myStack->mTransactionController->mServerTransactionMap)
warning: can't find class named `resip::SipStack', as given by C++ RTTI
$2 = {mMap = {_M_ht = {_M_node_allocator = {<No data fields>},
_M_hash = {<No data fields>},
_M_equals = {<binary_function<resip::Data,resip::Data,bool>> = {<No data f
ields>}, <No data fields>},
_M_get_key = {<unary_function<std::pair<const resip::Data, resip::Transact
ionState*>,const resip::Data>> = {<No data fields>}, <No data fields>},
_M_buckets = {<_Vector_base<__gnu_cxx::_Hashtable_node<std::pair<const res
ip::Data, resip::TransactionState*> >*,std::allocator<resip::TransactionState*>
>> = {<_Vector_alloc_base<__gnu_cxx::_Hashtable_node<std::pair<const resip::Data
, resip::TransactionState*> >*,std::allocator<resip::TransactionState*>,true>> =
{_M_start = 0x8cc3e790, _M_finish = 0x8cc567d4,
_M_end_of_storage = 0x8cc567d4}, <No data fields>}, <No data fields>
}, _M_num_elements = 10691}}}
Thanks
Frank Yuan
Emergent-Netsolutions.com
972-359-6600
FrankYuan wrote: I am still working on it and will let you know as soon as I find
anything related.
Thanks
Frank Yuan
Emergent-Netsolutions.com
972-359-6600
Byron Campen wrote:
This code was written long before my time here at resiprocate, so
I do not know. To those who are in the know, is this a relic that can
be safely done away with?
Did you verify whether or not you had a genuine memory leak (this is
something I am very interested to know)?
Best regards,
Byron Campen
My question why NoSize(0U-1) is used for mSize when clear func is
called.
mStateMachineFifo.size() may return either 0 or NoSize if the queue
is empty.
It should alway return 0 if the queue is empty and NoSize should not
be used.
NoSize causes confusion and is error prone.
Thanks
Frank Yuan
Emergent-Netsolutions.com
972-359-6600
Jason Fischl wrote:
On 9/20/06, Byron Campen <bcampen@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
As for your questions about AbstractFifo, I am unsure why
mSize is
needed. Can anyone answer this (or, answer why clear is a no-op)?
The clear method is virtual and gets defined in the subclasses.
I believe that mSize is there as an optimization.
_______________________________________________
resiprocate-devel mailing list
resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
|