Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Backpressure Demo has sporadic exception #162

Closed
frankbenoit opened this issue Mar 24, 2019 · 3 comments · Fixed by #167
Closed

Backpressure Demo has sporadic exception #162

frankbenoit opened this issue Mar 24, 2019 · 3 comments · Fixed by #167
Labels

Comments

@frankbenoit
Copy link

Hi

Sometime starting the demo, i get this message:

io.reactivex.exceptions.MissingBackpressureException: Can't deliver value 128 due to lack of requests

in the demo, I modified the onError from System.err.println to Throwable::printStacktrace.

io.reactivex.exceptions.MissingBackpressureException: Can't deliver value 128 due to lack of requests
	at io.reactivex.internal.operators.flowable.FlowableInterval$IntervalSubscriber.run(FlowableInterval.java:96)
	at io.reactivex.internal.schedulers.ScheduledDirectPeriodicTask.run(ScheduledDirectPeriodicTask.java:39)
	at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
	at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:308)
	at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:180)
	at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:294)
	at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
	at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
	at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748)

Adding the onBackpressureDrop() in this line seems to fix it. Is it correct?

.zipWith(Flowable.interval(3, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS), (item, interval) -> item)
.zipWith(Flowable.interval(3, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS).onBackpressureDrop(), (item, interval) -> item)

Frank

@rmichela rmichela added the bug label Mar 25, 2019
@rmichela
Copy link
Collaborator

@OlegDokuka Any ideas?

@rmichela
Copy link
Collaborator

rmichela commented Apr 3, 2019

Demos are still using 0.9.0. I tested with 0.10.0-RC1 and couldn't reproduce. Will update demos POMs and keep trying to reproduce.

@rmichela
Copy link
Collaborator

rmichela commented May 4, 2019

I believe this is fixed in 0.10.0

@rmichela rmichela closed this as completed May 4, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants