- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Operating Systems
- >
- Operating System - HP-UX
- >
- Re: new throwing exception
Operating System - HP-UX
1748239
Members
3536
Online
108759
Solutions
Forums
Categories
Company
Local Language
юдл
back
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Forums
Discussions
юдл
back
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Blogs
Information
Community
Resources
Community Language
Language
Forums
Blogs
Topic Options
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-10-2009 07:57 PM
тАО03-10-2009 07:57 PM
new throwing exception
Hi,
I see following stack trace on one HP-UX system , but when the same core is loaded on another machine the stack trace is different.
#0 0xc020c770 in kill+0x10 () from /lib/libc.2
(gdb) where
#0 0xc020c770 in kill+0x10 () from /lib/libc.2
#1 0xc01a6dac in raise+0x24 () from /lib/libc.2
#2 0xc01e8100 in abort_C+0x160 () from /lib/libc.2
#3 0xc01e815c in abort+0x1c () from /lib/libc.2
#4 0xc11c40d0 in std::terminate+0x38 () from /lib/libCsup_v2.2
#5 0xc11c4588 in ThrowException+0x70 () from /lib/libCsup_v2.2
#6 0xc11c4ae8 in __throw__FPvT1+0x14c () from /lib/libCsup_v2.2
#7 0xc11c6744 in operator new+0x124 () from /lib/libCsup_v2.2
#8 0x10f308 in std::basic_string,std::allocator>::_C_getRep+0x798 ()
#9 0x10e988 in std::basic_string,std::allocator>::replace+0xa18 ()
#10 0x10d2a4 in std::basic_string,std::allocator>::append+0x6a4 ()
#11 0xd3d37758 in CXMLNodeCreate::xmlNode+0x2d0 ()
On another system, the stack trace is coming as
#0 0xc020c770 in getaudproc+0x30 () from /lib/libc.2
#1 0xc01a6dac in _qfsn+0xebc () from /lib/libc.2
Is this due to memory corruption? or is there any patch to fix this issue?
I see following stack trace on one HP-UX system , but when the same core is loaded on another machine the stack trace is different.
#0 0xc020c770 in kill+0x10 () from /lib/libc.2
(gdb) where
#0 0xc020c770 in kill+0x10 () from /lib/libc.2
#1 0xc01a6dac in raise+0x24 () from /lib/libc.2
#2 0xc01e8100 in abort_C+0x160 () from /lib/libc.2
#3 0xc01e815c in abort+0x1c () from /lib/libc.2
#4 0xc11c40d0 in std::terminate+0x38 () from /lib/libCsup_v2.2
#5 0xc11c4588 in ThrowException+0x70 () from /lib/libCsup_v2.2
#6 0xc11c4ae8 in __throw__FPvT1+0x14c () from /lib/libCsup_v2.2
#7 0xc11c6744 in operator new+0x124 () from /lib/libCsup_v2.2
#8 0x10f308 in std::basic_string
#9 0x10e988 in std::basic_string
#10 0x10d2a4 in std::basic_string
#11 0xd3d37758 in CXMLNodeCreate::xmlNode+0x2d0 ()
On another system, the stack trace is coming as
#0 0xc020c770 in getaudproc+0x30 () from /lib/libc.2
#1 0xc01a6dac in _qfsn+0xebc () from /lib/libc.2
Is this due to memory corruption? or is there any patch to fix this issue?
- Tags:
- throw
3 REPLIES 3
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-11-2009 01:45 AM
тАО03-11-2009 01:45 AM
Re: new throwing exception
>I see following stack trace
You are out of heap space, it is throwing bad_alloc. You need to increase maxdsiz or check for leaks.
>but when the same core is loaded on another machine the stack trace is different.
Or course, you can't do that. You debug core files on the same system, or use gdb's packcore to move everything to another system.
You are out of heap space, it is throwing bad_alloc. You need to increase maxdsiz or check for leaks.
>but when the same core is loaded on another machine the stack trace is different.
Or course, you can't do that. You debug core files on the same system, or use gdb's packcore to move everything to another system.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-11-2009 02:26 AM
тАО03-11-2009 02:26 AM
Re: new throwing exception
This might be because the machines don't have all the same patches installed, so their /lib/libc.2 files are different.
On the first machine, the stack trace seems to make sense: the line #11 is probably something the application developers can recognize. Then there are some string operations at #10 .. #7, which has caused an exception, as indicated by #6 and #5. The latest elements of the stack trace (#0..#4) would be created by the exception handler of the C++ standard library: it just signals the OS to start creating the core dump.
On the second machine, the trace doesn't seem to reach the application level at all. Did you cut out parts of the trace, or is the two lines all you got? If the two lines is all, gdb stopped at that point because it recognized the trace is not valid.
It is best to analyze the core on the system it is generated on, or on another system with *exactly the same* OS release and patch set, otherwise your stack trace may mislead you.
MK
On the first machine, the stack trace seems to make sense: the line #11 is probably something the application developers can recognize. Then there are some string operations at #10 .. #7, which has caused an exception, as indicated by #6 and #5. The latest elements of the stack trace (#0..#4) would be created by the exception handler of the C++ standard library: it just signals the OS to start creating the core dump.
On the second machine, the trace doesn't seem to reach the application level at all. Did you cut out parts of the trace, or is the two lines all you got? If the two lines is all, gdb stopped at that point because it recognized the trace is not valid.
It is best to analyze the core on the system it is generated on, or on another system with *exactly the same* OS release and patch set, otherwise your stack trace may mislead you.
MK
MK
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-11-2009 12:22 PM
тАО03-11-2009 12:22 PM
Re: new throwing exception
>Matti: This might be because the machines don't have all the same patches installed
> ... with *exactly the same* OS release and patch set
Yes but don't even think about matching patches. Just use packcore and copy the load modules.
See the "Debugging core files using HP WDB" whitepaper under the WDB documentation link:
http://www.hp.com/go/wdb
> ... with *exactly the same* OS release and patch set
Yes but don't even think about matching patches. Just use packcore and copy the load modules.
See the "Debugging core files using HP WDB" whitepaper under the WDB documentation link:
http://www.hp.com/go/wdb
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Hewlett Packard Enterprise. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation.
News and Events
Support
© Copyright 2024 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP