2011/7/21 Matthias Radestock <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:matthias@rabbitmq.com">matthias@rabbitmq.com</a>></span><br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div id=":1a8">That means the server got a content header or body frame, which in case of client->server communication can only be as part of a publish. The most likely cause is the client sending more content body frames than it should, e.g. a trailing empty frame.<br>
<br>
It should be possible to spot that from the tracer / wireshark.<div class="im"><br></div></div></blockquote><div><br>Yes, it is purely a publishing issue and the idea of extra frames has crossed my mind. Wireshark doesn't prove it though.<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><div id=":1a8"><div class="im">
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
Is it a good idea to make Rabbit log such issues with more detail (it<br>
shouldn't affect hot code path performance anyway)?<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
We wouldn't want to log complete frame contents since that would introduce a major DoS attack vector. Having said that, the error that is logged (and indeed returned to the client) should include some more info than it currently does. I have filed a bug for that.</div>
</blockquote></div><br>I still need to find a way to patch my local rabbit copy to get more information. What's a good way to keep a few recent frames around? Is it possible to implement as a plugin?<br clear="all"><br>
-- <br>MK<br><br><a href="http://github.com/michaelklishin" target="_blank">http://github.com/michaelklishin</a><br><a href="http://twitter.com/michaelklishin" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/michaelklishin</a><br><br>