Bill Shannon wrote:
> The real answer is that I didn't evaluate all possible exceptions to
> determine which ones should be considered transient failures.
>
> Do you think UnknownHostException is more likely a transient error?
I'm not sure.
In theory the hostname in das.properties was valid when the instance
was created -- since we verify it (create-local-instance must be
able to talk to the DAS to create the instance and
_create-instance-filesystem does a check too for the SSH case).
So either the file has gotten corrupted, or there is a name service
outage, or the name service data has changed. I guess only one of
those is truly transient.
I'm not sure what the right answer is, but it did surprise me. I figured
if the instance can't talk to the DAS -- no matter the reason -- it
would still come up.
Joe
P.S. I'm hitting this on the Mac where for some reason a restarted
instance can't resolve the DAS hostname -- even though the originally
started in stance can!?!
>
>
> Joe Di Pol wrote on 10/11/10 03:52 PM:
>>
>> While looking into a different problem I noticed that
>> if an instance gets an UnknownHostException while attempting
>> to synchronize with the DAS it does not come up. If it
>> gets a ConnectionException (like when the DAS is down) it
>> does come up.
>>
>> Is there a reason why the former case does not behave like the later?
>> Is it because we think UnknownHostException is more likely
>> to be a configuration error than a transient name service problem?
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: admin-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>> For additional commands, e-mail: admin-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: admin-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: admin-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>