Bug 10897 - Repeated posting of 300K of bad JSON
: Repeated posting of 300K of bad JSON
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Product: SqueezePlay
Classification: Unclassified
Component: SqueezeNetwork
: unspecified
: PC Other
: -- normal (vote)
: Investigating
Assigned To: Andy Grundman
:
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2009-01-29 19:56 UTC by Andy Grundman
Modified: 2019-01-25 12:01 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:
Category: ---


Attachments
ngrep capture (322.10 KB, text/plain)
2009-01-29 19:57 UTC, Andy Grundman
Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Andy Grundman 2009-01-29 19:56:37 UTC
I was randomly watching a jived process on SN and noticed a Jive sending 300K of bad JSON every few seconds.

Capture is attached.
Comment 1 Andy Grundman 2009-01-29 19:57:16 UTC
Created attachment 4728 [details]
ngrep capture
Comment 2 Andy Grundman 2009-01-29 20:01:29 UTC
Initial guess is the Jive is trying to reconnect and resubscribe, but has way too many subscriptions stacked up, can't encode it properly, gets an error response, and just keeps retrying.
Comment 3 Chris Owens 2009-03-16 09:51:00 UTC
We are now planning to make a 7.3.3 release.  Please review your bugs (all marked open against 7.3.3) to see if they can be fixed in the next few weeks, or if they should be retargeted for 7.4 or future.

Thanks!
Comment 4 Chris Owens 2009-03-30 17:20:11 UTC
Since there's now a planned 7.3.3 release, bugs which won't make the cut-off are being moved to the next target out.  If you feel that this bug needs to be addressed more (or less) urgently than the 7.4 release, please cc chris@slimdevices.com and leave a comment in the bug to that effect so we can review it.

Thanks.
Comment 5 Blackketter Dean 2009-07-22 08:40:06 UTC
Moving to the product SqueezePlay because this bug appears to apply to any player based on that application code.  Feel free to move it back if it's specific to the single original product.
Comment 6 Richard Titmuss 2009-07-27 06:36:49 UTC
Andy, do you still see this?
Comment 7 Andy Grundman 2009-07-27 06:39:32 UTC
Don't know, we can reduce the priority on it.
Comment 8 Ben Klaas 2009-08-26 07:49:31 UTC
this is an administrative shuffle on priority fields to help make better judgment on the top end of the priority list. P4->P5, P3->P4, and P2->P3.
Comment 9 Richard Titmuss 2009-09-29 04:10:45 UTC
Andy, let me know if you still see this.