Calling getT3Srvr too early

          I wrote a small java application monitoring adding/deleting cluster members using
          JMX notification(Listening on ClusterMBean). I keep getting the following error
          when I delete a member from a cluster:
          weblogic.utils.AssertionError: ***** ASSERTION FAILED *****[ Calling getT3Srvr
          too early. This can happen when you have a static initializer or static variable
          pointing to T3Srvr.getT3Srvr() and your class is gettingloaded prior to T3Srvr.
          at weblogic.t3.srvr.T3Srvr.getT3Srvr(T3Srvr.java:119)
          at weblogic.management.internal.Helper.isAccessAllowed(Helper.java:1837)
          at weblogic.management.internal.AttributeChangeNotification.getOldValue(AttributeChangeNotification.java:175)
          at weblogic.management.internal.MBeanProxy.wrapNotification(MBeanProxy.java:765)
          at weblogic.management.internal.MBeanProxy.sendNotification(MBeanProxy.java:850)
          at weblogic.management.internal.BaseNotificationListenerImpl.handleNotification(BaseNotificationListenerImpl.java:71)
          at weblogic.management.internal.RelayNotificationListenerImpl_WLSkel.invoke(Unknown
          Source)
          at weblogic.rmi.internal.BasicServerRef.invoke(BasicServerRef.java:359)
          at weblogic.rmi.internal.BasicServerRef$1.run(BasicServerRef.java:313)
          at weblogic.security.service.SecurityServiceManager.runAs(SecurityServiceManager.java:762)
          at weblogic.rmi.internal.BasicServerRef.handleRequest(BasicServerRef.java:308)
          at weblogic.rmi.internal.BasicExecuteRequest.execute(BasicExecuteRequest.java:30)
          at weblogic.kernel.ExecuteThread.execute(ExecuteThread.java:152)
          at weblogic.kernel.ExecuteThread.run(ExecuteThread.java:133)
          <Jan 14, 2003 10:10:31 AM EST> <Warning> <rmi> <080004> <Error thrown by rmi server:
          weblogic.management.internal.RelayNotificationListenerImpl.handleNotification(Ljavax.management.Notification;Ljava.lang.Object;)
          I don't use static variables or blocks in my code. Any body saw similar errors
          or know how to fix it?

Similar Messages

Preflight droplet process returns too early – before it's done

I'm calling an Acrobat preflight DROPLET from program that I'm writing, and I need to know when the files are ready, that is when the preflight fixups are done.
I need to know this in order to go on with some other file system stuff in my program, that needs to be done after the preflight fixups.
I guess the droplet just tells Acrobat what to do, and then exits. The Droplet process stays up for a while but exits before the work is done.
There is an question from 2009 asking the exact same thing, but no answer. Preflight droplet returns too early
Since it's in a locked section of the forum I venture to ask the same question now, six years later.
Checking the modified dates of all files does not seem to work since a preflight obviously does not alter files that are not in need of being altered.
I'm on windows, and I don't know whether this is a platform dependent problem.
What should I do?
Thanks,
Andreas

This is not a good way to do it. But this is the way I do it now...
It seems to work but there is no guarantee that it will work in the future, or even on all machines.
private static int WaitForAcrobatReady() {
// Get the current Acrobat instance.
var app = new Acrobat.AcroApp();
// While a preflight (droplet) is running, app.GetNumAVDocs() will
// not return ANYTHING, it will just hang.
return app.GetNumAVDocs();
To sum up the efforts of the last weeks: Acrobat doesn't seem to be made for inclusion in other automation jobs. This is just another thing that doesn't work.
(I had to use the C# library PDFSharp to do other things that Acrobat can do really well only that it's not possible to set those properties, or start that kind of actions, from "outside".)

Preflight droplet returns too early

I want to convert a color PDF into grayscale. So I created a new preflight profile where nothing happens except color fixup:
Advanced > Print Production > Preflight
PDF Fixups > Convert to Grayscale
I saved the profile and created a Droplet named grey.exe.
When I call grey.exe smallSize_1MB.pdf everything is fine. But when I have to convert a PDF having big filesize like grey.exe bigSize_160MB.pdf the Droplet .exe process returns before the preflight is done.
Problems: A script (e.g. a batch file) continues without waiting for the Droplet to finish. So the script cannot make use the Droplet's result, e.g. a preflight report or the converted PDF file.
Why does the Droplet's .exe process return too early? Everybody can test this with the help of the attached Droplet and the following batch scripts:
smallSize.bat (use something small, e.g. 1 MB or smaller):
copy /Y smallSize.pdf tmp.pdf
grey.exe tmp.pdf
echo "return"
pause
bigSize.bat (use something really big, e.g. 160 MB or bigger):
copy /Y bigSize.pdf tmp.pdf
grey.exe tmp.pdf
echo "return"
pause
Ideas, anyone?
Message was edited by: Droptix I am using Adobe Acrobat 8.0 Professional.
Message was edited by: Droptix As an alternative I can imagine to re-produce the Droplet's function by Interapplication communication (IAC) through OLE, see http://www.adobe.com/devnet/acrobat/interapplication.html -> if anyone can tell me how to do a grayscale conversion via IAC/OLE... would be great! I know the IAC/OLE basics, can open, save and edit PDFs but don't know how to convert. It would also be possible to use: Advanced/Print Production/Convert Colors > set all Document Colors to convert > set Blending profile for instance to Gray Gamma 1.8 > set conversion options to don't embed profile.

This is not a good way to do it. But this is the way I do it now...
It seems to work but there is no guarantee that it will work in the future, or even on all machines.
private static int WaitForAcrobatReady() {
// Get the current Acrobat instance.
var app = new Acrobat.AcroApp();
// While a preflight (droplet) is running, app.GetNumAVDocs() will
// not return ANYTHING, it will just hang.
return app.GetNumAVDocs();
To sum up the efforts of the last weeks: Acrobat doesn't seem to be made for inclusion in other automation jobs. This is just another thing that doesn't work.
(I had to use the C# library PDFSharp to do other things that Acrobat can do really well only that it's not possible to set those properties, or start that kind of actions, from "outside".)

CCME 4.0 matches number too early!

Hello,
once again I have a problem with my CCME 4.0.
It happens quite frequently that someone from the outside calls a extension within our organisation. But the CCME bagins matching too early, before all digits are received. One or sometimes even two digits are left out.
Example:
Caller dials 12345-234 with 12345 being the main number and 234 being the extension. Now the CCM begins matching at 12345-23 already. The voice rule for incoming calls now cuts all but the last three digits and tries to match that to an extension. But since there is a digit missing, the CCM tries to match "523" instead of "234". And of course the extension "523" does not exist. So the caller gets a "number not assigned".
This is quite annoying! How can I force the CCME to wait until all digits are received from the telephony service provider?
Regards,
Eyad Tayeb.

The requested debug (of a succesful call):
2006-09-06 13:27:36 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960443: <009><009>Component = Invoke component
2006-09-06 13:27:36 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960444: <009><009><009>Invoke Id = 22962
2006-09-06 13:27:36 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960445: <009><009><009>Operation = Diversion Leg2
2006-09-06 13:27:36 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960446: <009>Progress Ind i = 0x8183 - Origination address is non-ISDN
2006-09-06 13:27:36 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960447: <009>Calling Party Number i = 0x2181, '3462211214'
2006-09-06 13:27:36 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960448: <009><009>Plan:
2006-09-06 13:27:36 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960449: ISDN, Type:National
2006-09-06 13:27:36 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960450: <009>Called Party Number i = 0xC1, '9209299'
2006-09-06 13:27:36 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960451: <009><009>Plan:ISDN, Type:Subscriber(local)
2006-09-06 13:27:36 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960452: 533213: Sep 6 15:27:45.121: ISDN BR0/1/1 EVENT: process_rxstate: ces/callid 1/0x192A calltype 2 HOST_INCOMING_CALL
2006-09-06 13:27:36 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960453: 533214: Sep 6 15:27:45.121: ISDN BR0/1/1 EVENT: host_incoming_call: call_id 0x192A, Guid = 50AAF3E5965D bchan 0
10.10.1.251 960462: 533223: Sep 6 15:27:45.125: ISDN BR0/1/1 Q931: extract_redirect_orig_called_ie: IE type redirecting num none reason 15 cnt 1 plan -1 type 0 pres 1
2006-09-06 13:27:36 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960463: 533224: Sep 6 15:27:45.125: //-1/xxxxxxxxxxxx/DPM/dpAssociateIncomingPeerCore:
2006-09-06 13:27:36 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960464: Calling Number=3462211214, Called Number=9209299, Voice-Interface=0x46AA9C28,
2006-09-06 13:27:36 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960486: 2: Dial-peer Tag=299
2006-09-06 13:27:36 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960487: 533232: Sep 6 15:27:45.133: //-1/50AAF3E5965D/DPM/dpMatchPeersCore:
2006-09-06 13:27:37 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960489: 533233: Sep 6 15:27:45.133: //-1/50AAF3E5965D/DPM/dpMatchPeersCore:
2006-09-06 13:27:37 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960490: Match Rule=DP_MATCH_DEST; Called Number=299
2006-09-06 13:27:37 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960491: 533234: Sep 6 15:27:45.133: //-1/50AAF3E5965D/DPM/dpMatchPeersCore:
2006-09-06 13:27:37 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960492: Result=Success(0) after DP_MATCH_DEST
2006-09-06 13:27:37 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960494: Result=SUCCESS(0)
2006-09-06 13:27:37 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960495: List of Matched Outgoing Dial-peer(s):
2006-09-06 13:27:37 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960496: 1: Dial-peer Tag=20003
2006-09-06 13:27:37 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960497: 2: Dial-peer Tag=299
2006-09-06 13:27:37 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960498: 533236: Sep 6 15:27:45.137: ISDN BR0/1/1 Q931: TX -> CALL_PROC pd = 8 callref = 0x81
2006-09-06 13:27:37 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960499: <009>Channel ID i = 0x89
2006-09-06 13:27:37 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960500: <009><009>Exclusive, B1
2006-09-06 13:27:37 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960501: 533237: Sep 6 15:27:45.153: ISDN BR0/1/1 Q931: TX -> ALERTING pd = 8 callref = 0x81
2006-09-06 13:27:43 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960502: 533238: Sep 6 15:27:51.825: ISDN BR0/1/1 Q931: TX -> CONNECT pd = 8 callref = 0x81
2006-09-06 13:27:43 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960503: <009>Channel ID i = 0x89
2006-09-06 13:27:43 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960504: <009><009>Exclusive, B1
2006-09-06 13:27:43 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960505: 533239: Sep 6 15:27:51.929: ISDN BR0/1/1 Q931: RX <- CONNECT_ACK pd = 8 callref = 0x01
2006-09-06 13:27:43 UTC Local7.Debug 10.10.1.251 960506: 533240: Sep 6 15:27:51.929: ISDN BR0/1/1 EVENT: process_rxstate: ces/callid 1/0x192A calltype 2 HOST_CONNECT
2006-09-06 13:27:44 UTC Local7.Info 10.10.1.251 960507: 533241: Sep 6 15:27:51.933: %ISDN-6-CONNECT: Interface BRI0/1/1:1 is now connected to 3462211214

Windows TCP Socket Buffer Hitting Plateau Too Early

Note: This is a repost of a ServerFault Question edited over the course of a few days, originally here: http://serverfault.com/questions/608060/windows-tcp-window-scaling-hitting-plateau-too-early
Scenario: We have a number of Windows clients regularly uploading large files (FTP/SVN/HTTP PUT/SCP) to Linux servers that are ~100-160ms away. We have 1Gbit/s synchronous bandwidth at the office and the servers are either AWS instances or physically hosted
in US DCs.
The initial report was that uploads to a new server instance were much slower than they could be. This bore out in testing and from multiple locations; clients were seeing stable 2-5Mbit/s to the host from their Windows systems.
I broke out iperf
-s on a an AWS instance and then from a Windows client in the office:
iperf
-c 1.2.3.4
[ 5] local 10.169.40.14 port 5001 connected with 1.2.3.4 port 55185
[ 5] 0.0-10.0 sec 6.55 MBytes 5.48 Mbits/sec
iperf
-w1M -c 1.2.3.4
[ 4] local 10.169.40.14 port 5001 connected with 1.2.3.4 port 55239
[ 4] 0.0-18.3 sec 196 MBytes 89.6 Mbits/sec
The latter figure can vary significantly on subsequent tests, (Vagaries of AWS) but is usually between 70 and 130Mbit/s which is more than enough for our needs. Wiresharking the session, I can see:
iperf
-c Windows SYN - Window 64kb, Scale 1 - Linux SYN, ACK: Window 14kb, Scale: 9 (*512)
iperf
-c -w1M Windows SYN - Windows 64kb, Scale 1 - Linux SYN, ACK: Window 14kb, Scale: 9
Clearly the link can sustain this high throughput, but I have to explicity set the window size to make any use of it, which most real world applications won't let me do. The TCP handshakes use the same starting points in each case, but the forced one scales
Conversely, from a Linux client on the same network a straight, iperf
-c (using the system default 85kb) gives me:
[ 5] local 10.169.40.14 port 5001 connected with 1.2.3.4 port 33263
[ 5] 0.0-10.8 sec 142 MBytes 110 Mbits/sec
Without any forcing, it scales as expected. This can't be something in the intervening hops or our local switches/routers and seems to affect Windows 7 and 8 clients alike. I've read lots of guides on auto-tuning, but these are typically about disabling scaling
altogether to work around bad terrible home networking kit.
Can anyone tell me what's happening here and give me a way of fixing it? (Preferably something I can stick in to the registry via GPO.)
Notes
The AWS Linux instance in question has the following kernel settings applied in sysctl.conf:
net.core.rmem_max = 16777216
net.core.wmem_max = 16777216
net.core.rmem_default = 1048576
net.core.wmem_default = 1048576
net.ipv4.tcp_rmem = 4096 1048576 16777216
net.ipv4.tcp_wmem = 4096 1048576 16777216
I've used dd
if=/dev/zero | nc redirecting to /dev/null at
the server end to rule out iperfand
remove any other possible bottlenecks, but the results are much the same. Tests with ncftp(Cygwin,
Native Windows, Linux) scale in much the same way as the above iperf tests on their respective platforms.
First fix attempts.
Enabling CTCP - This makes no difference; window scaling is identical. (If I understand this correctly, this setting increases the rate at which the congestion window is enlarged rather than the maximum size it can reach)
Enabling TCP timestamps. - No change here either.
Nagle's algorithm - That makes sense and at least it means I can probably ignore that particular blips in the graph as any indication of the problem.
pcap files: Zip file available here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/104qdysmk01lnf6/iperf-pcaps-10s-Win%2BLinux-2014-06-30.zip (Anonymised
with bittwiste, extracts to ~150MB as there's one from each OS client for comparison)
Second fix attempts.
I've enabled ctcp and disabled chimney offloading: TCP Global Parameters
Receive-Side Scaling State : enabled
Chimney Offload State : disabled
NetDMA State : enabled
Direct Cache Acess (DCA) : disabled
Receive Window Auto-Tuning Level : normal
Add-On Congestion Control Provider : ctcp
ECN Capability : disabled
RFC 1323 Timestamps : enabled
Initial RTO : 3000
Non Sack Rtt Resiliency : disabled
But sadly, no change in the throughput.
I do have a cause/effect question here, though: The graphs are of the RWIN value set in the server's ACKs to the client. With Windows clients, am I right in thinking that Linux isn't scaling this value beyond that low point because the client's limited CWIN
prevents even that buffer from being filled? Could there be some other reason that Linux is artificially limiting the RWIN?
Note: I've tried turning on ECN for the hell of it; but no change, there.
Third fix attempts.
No change following disabling heuristics and RWIN autotuning. Have updated the Intel network drivers to the latest (12.10.28.0) with software that exposes functioanlity tweaks viadevice manager tabs. The card is an 82579V Chipset on-board NIC - (I'm going to
do some more testing from clients with realtek or other vendors)
Focusing on the NIC for a moment, I've tried the following (Mostly just ruling out unlikely culprits):
Increase receive buffers to 2k from 256 and transmit buffers to 2k from 512 (Both now at maximum) - No change
Disabled all IP/TCP/UDP checksum offloading. - No change.
Disabled Large Send Offload - Nada.
Turned off IPv6, QoS scheduling - Nowt.
Further investigation
Trying to eliminate the Linux server side, I started up a Server 2012R2 instance and repeated the tests using iperf (cygwin
binary) and NTttcp.
With iperf,
I had to explicitly specify -w1m on both sides
before the connection would scale beyond ~5Mbit/s. (Incidentally, I could be checked and the BDP of ~5Mbits at 91ms latency is almost precisely 64kb. Spot the limit...)
The ntttcp binaries showed now such limitation. Using ntttcpr
-m 1,0,1.2.3.5 on the server and ntttcp
-s -m 1,0,1.2.3.5 -t 10 on the client, I can see much better throughput:
Copyright Version 5.28
Network activity progressing...
Thread Time(s) Throughput(KB/s) Avg B / Compl
====== ======= ================ =============
0 9.990 8155.355 65536.000
##### Totals: #####
Bytes(MEG) realtime(s) Avg Frame Size Throughput(MB/s)
================ =========== ============== ================
79.562500 10.001 1442.556 7.955
Throughput(Buffers/s) Cycles/Byte Buffers
===================== =========== =============
127.287 308.256 1273.000
DPCs(count/s) Pkts(num/DPC) Intr(count/s) Pkts(num/intr)
============= ============= =============== ==============
1868.713 0.785 9336.366 0.157
Packets Sent Packets Received Retransmits Errors Avg. CPU %
============ ================ =========== ====== ==========
57833 14664 0 0 9.476
8MB/s puts it up at the levels I was getting with explicitly large windows in iperf.
Oddly, though, 80MB in 1273 buffers = a 64kB buffer again. A further wireshark shows a good, variable RWIN coming back from the server (Scale factor 256) that the client seems to fulfil; so perhaps ntttcp is misreporting the send window.
Further PCAP files have been provided, here:https://www.dropbox.com/s/dtlvy1vi46x75it/iperf%2Bntttcp%2Bftp-pcaps-2014-07-03.zip
Two more iperfs,
both from Windows to the same Linux server as before (1.2.3.4): One with a 128k Socket size and default 64k window (restricts to ~5Mbit/s again) and one with a 1MB send window and default 8kb socket size. (scales higher)
One ntttcp trace
from the same Windows client to a Server 2012R2 EC2 instance (1.2.3.5). here, the throughput scales well. Note: NTttcp does something odd on port 6001 before it opens the test connection. Not sure what's happening there.
One FTP data trace, uploading 20MB of /dev/urandom to
a near identical linux host (1.2.3.6) using Cygwin ncftp.
Again the limit is there. The pattern is much the same using Windows Filezilla.
Changing the iperf buffer
length does make the expected difference to the time sequence graph (much more vertical sections), but the actual throughput is unchanged.
So we have a final question through all of this: Where is this limitation creeping in? If we simply have user-space software not written to take advantage of Long Fat Networks, can anything be done in the OS to improve the situation?

Hi,
Thanks for posting in Microsoft TechNet forums.
I will try to involve someone familiar with this topic to further look at this issue. There might be some time delay. Appreciate your patience.
Thank you for your understanding and support.
Kate Li
TechNet Community Support

Exchange 2007 SP3 Install on 2008R2 Fails with "The data passed to a system call is too small"

I'm installing Exchange 2007 SP3 onto Server 2008 R2. I have run this install in compatibility mode and in normal install mode with the same results. Error code 3221684346: The data area passed to a system call is too small. I am installing directly from
the SP3 files, this is not an upgrade. What do I have to do to get this to work?
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [2] Interpreting line <CreateSecureKey:MSExchangeIS\ParametersPrivate> -- ID:31259 --
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [2] CInsParser::ScProcessLine (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\libs\exsetup\hiddenw1.cxx:1199)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [2] Processing file 'C:\Exchange Server\Setup\data\mdb_reg.ins', at or near line 77 (CreateSecureKey:MSExchangeIS\ParametersPrivate) -- ID:31111 -- CInsParser::ScProcessLine (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\libs\exsetup\hiddenw1.cxx:488)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [2] Registry file name: 'C:\Exchange Server\Setup\data\mdb_reg.ins' CRegistryManager::ScProcessFile (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\udog\setupbase\tools\regmgr.cxx:125)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [2] Filename = 'C:\Exchange Server\Setup\data\mdb_reg' CBaseAtom::ScRunRegistryFile (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\udog\setupbase\basecomp\baseatom.cxx:1379)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [2] Leaving CBaseAtom(Information Store Service)::ScRunRegistryFile
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [2] Filename = 'C:\Exchange Server\Setup\data\mdb_reg' CBaseAtom::ScAddRegistryKeys (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\udog\setupbase\basecomp\baseatom.cxx:1249)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [2] Leaving CBaseAtom(Information Store Service)::ScAddRegistryKeys
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [2] CAtomBaseMDB::ScAddRegistryKeys (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\udog\exsetdata\components\server\a_basemdb.cxx:132)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [2] Leaving CAtomBaseMDB::ScAddRegistryKeys
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [2] CBaseAtom::ScAdd (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\udog\setupbase\basecomp\baseatom.cxx:639)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [2] Leaving CBaseAtom(Information Store Service)::ScAdd
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [2] Service = 'MSExchangeIS' CBaseServiceAtom::ScAdd (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\udog\setupbase\basecomp\basesvcatom.cxx:203)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [2] Leaving CBaseServiceAtom(Information Store Service)::ScAdd
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [2] mode = 'Install' (61953) CBaseAtom::ScSetup (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\udog\setupbase\basecomp\baseatom.cxx:535)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [2] ScSetupAtom (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\udog\exsetdata\exsetds.cxx:897)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [2] Leaving ScSetupAtom
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [2] [ERROR] An error occurred. The error code was 3221684346. The message was The data area passed to a system call is too small..
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [1] The following 1 error(s) occurred during task execution:
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [1] 0. ErrorRecord: An error occurred. The error code was 3221684346. The message was The data area passed to a system call is too small..
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [1] 0. ErrorRecord: Microsoft.Exchange.Management.Deployment.ExsetdataException: An error occurred. The error code was 3221684346. The message was The data area passed to a system call is too small..
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [1] [ERROR] An error occurred. The error code was 3221684346. The message was The data area passed to a system call is too small..
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [1] Setup is halting task execution because of one or more errors in a critical task.
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [1] Finished executing component tasks.
[2/15/2011 7:24:18 AM] [1] Ending processing.
[2/15/2011 7:42:08 AM] [0] End of Setup
[2/15/2011 7:42:08 AM] [0] **********************************************

I would probably rebuild the host machine. The Exchange installation should occur without any issues, and where a problem does occur that can be an indication of a more widespread problem. Rebuild the machine, reinstall the prerequisites and try again.
Simon.
Simon Butler, Exchange MVP
Blog |
Exchange Resources | In the UK?
Hire Me.
Hello Poster.
I am having the same issue, however it is most likely NOT a host box problem. The above advice is not a fix. I have 3 servers that are cloned with the same setup. 2 were fixed by doing the Vista compatibility trick, this one gave a different error (which
happened to be the same as above). This org was a 5.5 to 2000. to 2003 coexistence with 2007 currently(because the mailbox role won't install). It has something to do with AD or permissions. Server 2008 r2 inherently has problems installing exchange.
Example, having to use vista compatibility to get the mailbox role to install. SP2 patch gives the same error to some people, and also doesn't upgrade the mailbox role properly in some cases. Some people have had luck restarting the IIS admin service, but
that did not solve my copy of this error. I will repost here if I find a solution to this issue...
Same exact setup log for me as well.
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] Interpreting line <OpenMachineKey:SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services> -- ID:31259 --
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] Interpreting line <CreateSecureKey:MSExchangeIS\ParametersPrivate> -- ID:31259 --
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] CInsParser::ScProcessLine (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\libs\exsetup\hiddenw1.cxx:1199)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] Processing file 'C:\Program Files\Microsoft\Exchange Server\Setup\data\mdb_reg.ins', at or near line 77 (CreateSecureKey:MSExchangeIS\ParametersPrivate) -- ID:31111 -- CInsParser::ScProcessLine (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\libs\exsetup\hiddenw1.cxx:488)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] Registry file name: 'C:\Program Files\Microsoft\Exchange Server\Setup\data\mdb_reg.ins' CRegistryManager::ScProcessFile (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\udog\setupbase\tools\regmgr.cxx:125)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] Filename = 'C:\Program Files\Microsoft\Exchange Server\Setup\data\mdb_reg' CBaseAtom::ScRunRegistryFile (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\udog\setupbase\basecomp\baseatom.cxx:1379)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] Leaving CBaseAtom(Information Store Service)::ScRunRegistryFile
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] Filename = 'C:\Program Files\Microsoft\Exchange Server\Setup\data\mdb_reg' CBaseAtom::ScAddRegistryKeys (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\udog\setupbase\basecomp\baseatom.cxx:1249)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] Leaving CBaseAtom(Information Store Service)::ScAddRegistryKeys
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] CAtomBaseMDB::ScAddRegistryKeys (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\udog\exsetdata\components\server\a_basemdb.cxx:132)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] Leaving CAtomBaseMDB::ScAddRegistryKeys
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] CBaseAtom::ScAdd (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\udog\setupbase\basecomp\baseatom.cxx:639)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] Leaving CBaseAtom(Information Store Service)::ScAdd
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] Service = 'MSExchangeIS' CBaseServiceAtom::ScAdd (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\udog\setupbase\basecomp\basesvcatom.cxx:203)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] Leaving CBaseServiceAtom(Information Store Service)::ScAdd
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] mode = 'Install' (61953) CBaseAtom::ScSetup (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\udog\setupbase\basecomp\baseatom.cxx:535)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] ScSetupAtom (f:\08.03.0083\sources\dev\admin\src\udog\exsetdata\exsetds.cxx:897)
           Error code 0XC007007A (122): The data area passed to a system call is too small.
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] Leaving ScSetupAtom
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [2] [ERROR] An error occurred. The error code was 3221684346. The message was The data area passed to a system call is too small..
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [1] The following 1 error(s) occurred during task execution:
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [1] 0. ErrorRecord: An error occurred. The error code was 3221684346. The message was The data area passed to a system call is too small..
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [1] 0. ErrorRecord: Microsoft.Exchange.Management.Deployment.ExsetdataException: An error occurred. The error code was 3221684346. The message was The data area passed to a system call is too small..
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [1] [ERROR] An error occurred. The error code was 3221684346. The message was The data area passed to a system call is too small..
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [1] Setup is halting task execution because of one or more errors in a critical task.
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [1] Finished executing component tasks.
[3/4/2011 10:45:51 AM] [1] Ending processing.
Just curious though, how long is your FQDN? Mine is 34 characters plus whatever exchange is adding to it during setup for this particular string. I found a post with the same error for ISA server and some buffer is only 100 characters for a system call.
ERROR_INSUFFICIENT_BUFFER 122 (0x7A) The data area passed to a system call is too small. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms681382(v=vs.85).aspx Indicates a msft programming problem.
Outsource Technology Inc. MSFT Professional Consultant

Material Cost Estimate - Release too early

Hi,
I ran the cost estimate for one material on 12.06.2008 and i released the cost estimate. Here it is saying 'Cost Estimate released too early'. I thought system is releasing the cost for material for the next month. but i want to update the material cost for this month only.
And how many days before you have to run the cost estimate for the new month.
sateesh

Hi Sateesh,
Please check the period which you have mentioned in CK24.
I think the period you have given is of next month. Hence system is giving that message as next month's period may not have been opened.
System allows to release cost estimate only once in a period. Normal practice is to carry out cost run at the end of the month.
Please do let me know if your problem is solved.
regards,
makrand

Chapter Markers End Jump Too Early-Problem

Folks, I am using DVDSP 4 and my chapter markers keep stopping too early from the burned DVD. When I play the Video_TS folder using Apple DVD player all is well. When I burn it and play it on a standard DVD player, all the chapter markers end jump earlier than they should - cutting off my full credit rolls on my video track.
All of my chapter markers came from Final Cut Pro where I initially made them.
Please advise.

Make sure you test this on more than one player if it is a "for real" project of replication or duplication. All players are not created equal and there are the real weird things that may show up on only one or two players, but you need to make sure. You may want to try the other methods and see if it helps on the problem player just for fun. (Yeah, I know does not sound like much fun, but it is sort of interesting I guess )

Outlook displays date of birthdays one day too early in MS Office 2007, 2010 and 2013

Hi
We are supporting several clients that has issues with Outlook. Different versions of Windows, Office and different exchange server versions. Some contacts' birthdays
just "magically" changes to one day too early. I have done extensive research with no answer. I have experienced this issue personally as early as about 2005 or 2006 with a Windows Mobile PDA.
Our local time is GMT +2 without daylight-savings. I have checked the settings in Windows (Vista Pro and Win 7 pro
x86 and x64) and the calendar settings, I have reloaded a couple of pc's, created new profiles, installed new server hardware with newer exchange. Even tried a few off-the-wall ideas like resetting all views to default.
Some users' address books are shared, some not. Some uses Apple, Android, BB or Windows phone, some don't. Some connects through VPN, some don't. Some uses
AVG, Avast, Eset Nod, Forticlient, Mcafee, etc....
I have been fighting this problem for months, and can find no conclusive answer that resolves this.
If I manually open the contact and rectify the date, it will stay correct for a very random time period and then shift
again.
I am about to lose a couple of my biggest clients, and probably my job as well, so I need urgent help.
Please no remarks on OS version, Office version or mobile devices, as this is definitely not the issue.
HELP!

Hi,
Have the users check on OWA, does the issue persist? Please also make sure the timezone of Exchange is also properly configured.
I'm not an expert about Exchange, I hope this blog can be helpful:
http://blogs.technet.com/b/fun_with_powershell/archive/2013/04/30/where-is-the-time-zone-property-stored-in-exchange-2010.aspx
To further dig the problem, rectify the date on owa and drop Outlook for a while(or one day), check the result the next day if the problem will come back.
Regards,
Melon Chen
TechNet Community Support

Windows 2008 x64 TS Printing - The data area passed to a system call is too small

Hi,
I have a Windows 2008 TS using Easy Print. The server has two quad core cpu's with 16Gb of ram and is running a light processing accounting program for 80 users. The machine and easy print both work fine until the server reaches about 5Gb of memory in use. Once this happens user's documents stop printing with event id's 6161 The data area passed to a system call is too small being logged. None of the hotfixes seem to be applicable to my scenario as I am not getting the common "Access Denied" error. I have increased received and transmit buffer sizes on both NIC's to the 2048 maximum, and set the Sizreqbuf setting in the registry - to no avail.
Any help appreciated.
Thanks

Hi,
Thanks for the post.
The Event error 6161 is caused by one of the following conditions:
The printer is not reachable on the network
Windows cannot allocate sufficient memory
There was invalid or incomplete data received by the print spooler
A driver upgrade failed
There is a bad printer device driver
For more information, please refer to the following article:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc773865(WS.10).aspx
In this case, I assume that this issue may be caused by the insufficient memory.
In Event Viewer, examine the event and look for the following text: "Win32 error code returned by the print processor: 8. Not enough storage is available to process this command".
If so, please collect system information for 60 seconds and generate a System Diagnostics Report:
Open an elevated Command Prompt window. (Click Start, point to All Programs, click Accessories, right-click Command Prompt, and then click Run as administrator.)
At the command prompt, type perfmon /report and then press ENTER. Reliability and Performance Monitor will start collecting data to create the System Diagnostics Report.
When the report is ready for viewing, locate the Diagnostic Results section of the report, and then check for any warnings (indicated by Warnings in the report). You can follow links to additional help on resolving warnings from this section. In addition, you can expand each category in the Basic System Checks section to see more details about why warnings appear. Also, the Performance section provides process-level details about top consumers of resources. You might need to increase the size of the paging file or add physical memory.
Thanks,
Miles

Recording starting too early and also ending too e...

Another problem.....
When recording programmes I am frequently finding that the recording is starting way too early...5-10 minutes....and often ends too early (very annoying as one misses the end of a particular programme).
Any help, gratefully received!
Thanks

Recording should start 2 minutes before the scheduled start time and end 5 minutes after the scheduled stop time (by default - you can increase this).
The box won't automatically cope with programmes which start late. Are the programmes you're having a problem with starting on time?
Is the time displayed on the box correct?

Songs ending too early

It seems that since the last update to I Tunes some songs are ending too early (30 to 1:30 too ealry). The get info button does not indicate the songs should end early. When i download the song again, the problem stops.

There could be a number of causes. If the iPod only plays a very short part of the file <10 secs this is usually down to problems with the structure of the file that iTunes can cope with but that causes the iPod to bail out. Re-encoding in iTunes will normally help, ie. re-rip or convert from MP3 to AAC or vice versa. Since all transcoding is lossy you should retain your original file as a backup in the hope that future firmware upgrades will fix this issue. iTunes also has a feature to allow you to exclude parts of a song from being played. Use *Get info* on a song in question and look at the Options tab. There are options here to set a start & stop time and to remember the playback position. Setting any of these will affect what gets played each time the track is selected. Finally, if you're playing songs in random order that are part of continous play albums the exact point at which the track stops may not be quite where you expect it to be.
tt2

Is it too early to start with JavaFX Mobile Development ?

There are no developer compnents except "TextBox"
The only samples i can see are "showing Photos in grid like structure & similar kinds of app" :(
it doesn't even support Swing
What developer wants "Data Entry Form" which user will submit data to Server Or Store data To Database & then Process the Data & return Result to user, Etc & much more req
why javaFx is more Media Oriented( Audio, Video,Graphics,Animation,Games,etc)
What benifits it provides to Developer.I am basically targetting JavaFX Mobile
Please Reply to help me understand What Can I do In JavaFx mobile domain
Thanks & Regards,
Pravin

Hello, and Welcome to the HP Support Community! As with any Internet Forum, you have to realize that you are visiting a "hospital" - most folks here are the minority who have had problems. If one was to judge the human race by visiting a hospital, you might run outside screaming "WE'RE ALL DOOMED! EVERYONE HERE IS SICK!!!" Those who have no issues at all do not come here and check in. The few that actually do come by and offer compliments are far and few between, and they are greatly appreciated by us! I've asked HP about Win10. They will not provide an answer until the final release is out. It could run with zero issues, or not! The Sprout is an amazing device - a large touchscreen All In One computer with some cool options not many other PC's could ever do! Is it too early? I've had one for almost a year (a loaner from HP for my participation here). Glitches? A few that were easily remedied. The decision is up to you. If worried about Win10, then wait a month or two. The device runs fine on Win 8.1. Why change to Win10? WyreNut

Safari gives up loading images too early

Hi
I have noticed that Safari (currently I am using 3.1.1 but I had noticed this behavior on earlier versions as well) usually gives up on loading images too early.
I have a 30Mbps internet connection and also in Firefox and Opera I do not experience the same problem.
Is this a known issue? Are there currently any workarounds around this problem?
Regards,
Behrang

From your Safari menu bar click Safari > Preferences then select the Privacy tab.
Click: Remove All Website Data
Then delete the cache.
Open a Finder window. From the Finder menu bar click Go > Go to Folder
Type or copy paste the following
~/Library/Caches/com.apple.Safari/Cache.db
Click Go then move the Cache.db file to the Trash.
Quit and relaunch Safari to test.
If nothing above helped, troubleshoot Safari extensions.
From the Safari menu bar click Safari > Preferences then select the Extensions tab. Turn that OFF, quit and relaunch Safari to test.
If that helped, turn one extension on then quit and relaunch Safari to test until you find the incompatible extension then click uninstall.

"The data area passed to a system call is too small" NFS client Windows 2008 R2 SP1

Hi
I need to map a Hyper-V virtual windows server to a UNIX folder, but when i made de mapping and tried to navigate in to the mapped unit and shows me:
"The data area passed to a system call is too small"
I tried too many things like adding a registry key (and windows 2008 r2 already has)
Use a similar account between Unix and Windows domain
I done the steps in the document:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc753302(WS.10).aspx
And nothing, this is just frustrating, also I disabled the firewall in the virtual machine and the host server.
I have a Windows 2008 Domain R2 functionality and the virtual machine is Windows 2008 R2 too.
The version of unix are:
AIX6.1 x64
AIX 6.3 x64
AIX 5.1 x86
Any Idea?
Thanks!
Doc MX

Hi,
You may perform the following troubleshooting suggestions:
l
Change how your NFS servers export the NFS shares and make them allow connections from high ports.
l
Add UseReservedPorts DWORD value under HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Client for NFS\CurrentVersion\Default and set it to 1. Restart the Client for NFS service to allow
the change to take effect.
For more information, please refer to the following Microsoft MSDN blog:
"Network Error 53", "The data area passed to a system call is too small" or "Unknown Error"
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/sfu/archive/2011/07/14/3087987.aspx
Regards,
Please remember to click “Mark as Answer” on the post that helps you, and to click “Unmark as Answer” if a marked post does not actually answer your question. This can be beneficial to other community members reading the thread.

Calling getT3Srvr too early

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for