dtrace discuss - May 2010 - jstack missing frames

Hi,

jstack() produces
com/sun/identity/sm/ServiceConfigImpl.getSubConfig(Lcom/iplanet/sso/SSOToken;Ljava/lang/String;)Lcom/sun/identity/sm/ServiceConfigImpl;
             
com/sun/identity/sm/ServiceConfig.getSubConfig(Ljava/lang/String;)Lcom/sun/identity/sm/ServiceConfig;
              com/sun/identity/idm/plugins/internal/SpecialRepo.sea
              0xffffffff78005e60
              0xffffffff78005e60
              0xffffffff78005d7c
              0xffffffff780063b8
              0xffffffff78005d7c
              0xffffffff780062d4
              0xffffffff78005d7c
              0xffffffff78005e60
              0xffffffff78005e60
              0xffffffff78005e60
              0xffffffff78005e60
              0xffffffff78005e60
              0xffffffff78005e60
              0xffffffff78005e60
              0xffffffff78005e60
              0xffffffff78005e60
              0xffffffff780063b8
              0xffffffff78005e60
              0xffffffff78005fdc
              0xffffffff78005fdc
              0xffffffff78005fdc
              0xffffffff78005e60
              0xffffffff780063b8
              0xffffffff78005e60
              0xffffffff78000240
             
libjvm.so`__1cJJavaCallsLcall_helper6FpnJJavaValue_pnMmethodHandle_pnRJavaCallArguments_pnGThread__v_+0x1f4
             
libjvm.so`__1cJJavaCallsEcall6FpnJJavaValue_nMmethodHandle_pnRJavaCallArguments_pnGThread__v_+0x34
              libjvm.so`JVM_DoPrivileged+0x974
             
libjava.so`Java_java_security_AccessController_doPrivileged__Ljava_security_PrivilegedExceptionAction_2Ljava_security_AccessControlContext_2+0x14
              0xffffffff7800def4
              0xffffffff7800de9c
              0xffffffff78005e60
              0xffffffff78005e60
              0xffffffff78005fdc
              0xffffffff78005fdc
              0xffffffff78005fdc
              0xffffffff78005fdc
              0xffffffff78005fdc
              0xffffffff78000240
             
libjvm.so`__1cJJavaCallsLcall_helper6FpnJJavaValue_pnMmethodHandle_pnRJavaCallArguments_pnGThread__v_+0x1f4
             
libjvm.so`__1cJJavaCallsEcall6FpnJJavaValue_nMmethodHandle_pnRJavaCallArguments_pnGThread__v_+0x34

this is using the hotspot provider. I not sure what I am missing where hex
addresses are shown. Can this be rectified?

Thanks
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org

this is now solved. Jarod in an earlier post suggested a bigger number of 
buffer size and string size. I had to go all the way to jstack(160,10240) to a
full stack. My testing increments were power of 2, so a smaller may have worked.

Does this mean on a 5440 this becomes a memory hog, since there is a per CPU
buffer allocation.?
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org

On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 04:22:54PM -0700, tester wrote:
> this is now solved. Jarod in an earlier post suggested a bigger
> number of buffer size and string size. I had to go all the way to
> jstack(160,10240) to a full stack. My testing increments were power of
> 2, so a smaller may have worked.
>
> Does this mean on a 5440 this becomes a memory hog, since there is a
> per CPU buffer allocation.?
These are allocated out of the per-CPU transaction and aggregation buffers,
so they won''t cause any additional allocations.   Since they use more
of those
buffers per entry, they may induce drops, which you would have to increase the
buffer sizes to avoid.

Cheers,
- jonathan