-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 778
'TokenStream contract violation: close() call missing' error for .jar files #2030
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
I can try to repro on the same setup ... |
I think I should have mentioned that I'm using Java 9. I was looking into it but was not able to produce a solution :/ This answer seems to be helpful: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/39920564/tokenstream-contract-violation-close-call-missing-when-calling-adddocument What seems to be the problem that we are not using proper workflow as mentioned here: The problem is related to the Hope this helps at least a little. |
this is good info |
I have just hit this on Travis Linux build too: https://travis-ci.org/vladak/OpenGrok/jobs/366215912 (Oracle JDK 8) however in different place:
|
Given how often this now fails in Travis I think this is a stopper candidate. |
@vladak that test is dumb from the point of view, that when it will not add to index one of the files in repo, the count will just be less ... |
So maybe we can disable/remove the test now and replace it (or that code behind) with something better later. |
For some reason I've started getting these exceptions (with |
I hit these exceptions only for |
Okay, this means this is not too serious. Waiving for now. That said, this should be addressed rather sooner than later since it creates test noise. |
Just to confirm some assumptions about this bug I built 1.2.8, took all the
So, couple of data points:
|
There has to be something special about
|
To dig further, I stopped the indexer when
The object (instance of The 2 For the record the thread stacks at this point were:
|
As I noted in #2778 I was seeing this in my tree with 1.2.8. I am running there repeatedly, but like @vladak am not seeing any consistency. I'll report any more traces here, but it sounds like you're far enough along that my traces may not help. |
Okay. I've done multiple full reindexes, and am not seeing this. Sorry. I saw it a few times, but have had many runs without it happening. |
No worries, I can reliably reproduce on my laptop.
Dne pá 31. 5. 2019 1:56 uživatel Chris Ross <[email protected]>
napsal:
… Okay. I've done multiple full reindexes, and am not seeing this. Sorry. I
saw it a few times, but have had many runs without it happening.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2030?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAWMMDEL5HMJFHHA6TWAMVLPYBSQZA5CNFSM4ETQVFW2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGODWT2PBQ#issuecomment-497526662>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAWMMDAWEZOTKPU5SE2A36LPYBSQZANCNFSM4ETQVFWQ>
.
|
https://www.apache.org/dist/commons/bcel/RELEASE-NOTES.txt |
ok, I guess we can update bcel from 6.2 to 6.4.1 |
You found the correct issue so yes, it is known. The consequence of the failure during the indexing is that contents of some
You can experiment with the -A and -i options of Indexer, i.e. assign different analyzer to |
My feeling is that this is something deeply baked into how the analyzers work in OpenGrok (in combination with Lucene) so very likely upgrading bcel will not help. |
Actually, using |
Thank you so much tarzanek sir and vladak sir for your quick response. I will definitely try the workaround. I will update the results soon here. |
Because Only the
|
@vladak , I think your debugging from 12-May-19 has the clue: I'm guessing our creating |
Test output:
Notice: sometimes the test passes and sometimes it does not -> probably race condition
Setup:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: