[LUCENE-4736] Some tests fail with IBM J9 due to strange TimerThread zombies that cannot be killed

• Type: Bug
• Status: Closed
• Priority: Major
• Resolution: Fixed
• Fix Version/s: 4.2, 6.0
• Lucene Fields: New
• Assignee: Dawid Weiss
• Reporter: Michael McCandless
• Created: 30/Jan/13 15:39
• Updated: 28/Aug/22 13:38
• Resolved: 31/Jan/13 22:23

Description

EG:

ant test -Dtestcase=TestIndexWriterDelete -Dtests.seed=A22BC3E06CEC0036

Takes a while and then fails with this:

[junit4:junit4] ERROR   0.00s J2 | TestIndexWriterDelete (suite) <<<
[junit4:junit4]    > Throwable #1:
com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.ThreadLeakError: 1 thread leaked
from SUITE scope at org.apache.lucene.index.TestIndexWriterDelete:
[junit4:junit4]    >    1) Thread[id=102, name=Thread-44,
state=TIMED_WAITING, group=TGRP-TestIndexWriterDelete]
[junit4:junit4]    >         at java.lang.Object.wait(Native Method)
[junit4:junit4]    >         at java.lang.Object.wait(Object.java:196)
[junit4:junit4]    >         at java.util.Timer$TimerImpl.run(Timer.java:247)
[junit4:junit4]    >    at __randomizedtesting.SeedInfo.seed([C9014BCB129899BF]:0)
[junit4:junit4]    > Throwable #2:
com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.ThreadLeakError: There are still
zombie threads that couldn't be terminated:
[junit4:junit4]    >    1) Thread[id=102, name=Thread-44,
state=TIMED_WAITING, group=TGRP-TestIndexWriterDelete]
[junit4:junit4]    >         at java.lang.Object.wait(Native Method)
[junit4:junit4]    >         at java.lang.Object.wait(Object.java:196)
[junit4:junit4]    >         at java.util.Timer$TimerImpl.run(Timer.java:247)
[junit4:junit4]    >    at __randomizedtesting.SeedInfo.seed([C9014BCB129899BF]:0)

Java version is:

java version "1.6.0"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build pxa6460sr9fp2ifix-20111111_05(SR9 FP2+IV03622+IV02378+IZ99243+IZ97310+IV00707))
IBM J9 VM (build 2.4, JRE 1.6.0 IBM J9 2.4 Linux amd64-64 jvmxa6460sr9-20111111_94827 (JIT enabled, AOT enabled)
J9VM - 20111111_094827
JIT  - r9_20101028_17488ifx45
GC   - 20101027_AA)
JCL  - 20110727_04

Curiously, I think it tends to happen on a test that fails an assumption? Or maybe I'm just imagining that ...