If broken it is, fix it you should

Using the powers of the debugger to solve the problems of the world - and a bag of chips    by Tess Ferrandez, ASP.NET Escalation Engineer (Microsoft)

Are you aware that you have thrown over 40,000 exceptions in the last 3 hours?

Are you aware that you have thrown over 40,000 exceptions in the last 3 hours?

Rate This
  • Comments 51

This may seem like a preposterous statement, but unfortunately it’s all too common.

In my work I go through a lot of dumps, somewhere in the neighborhood of 5-20 in a day:) Since the information is readily available to me, I usually do a quick check for the number of exceptions that the application has thrown and what types of exceptions they are so I can make the customers aware. More often than not, the applications are throwing a lot more exceptions than the developers expected, or they were expecting them but didn’t know that they can actually cause a problem since they don’t seem to have a direct effect on the application.

So why are they so bad? If they are handled and the end users don’t see them are they really harmful?

I can think of 3 reasons off the top of my head.

  • Exceptions are expensive.
  • Exceptions can take you into unnecessary code paths.
  • Exceptions are generally thrown when something went wrong.

Exceptions are expensive

Chris Brumme wrote an excellent blog on exceptions and how they work called The Exception Model that you should read if you have the time (definitely worth it).

In his blog he lists some of the things that happen when you throw an exception

  • Grab a stack trace by interpreting metadata emitted by the compiler to guide our stack unwind.
  • Run through a chain of handlers up the stack, calling each handler twice.
  • Compensate for mismatches between SEH, C++ and managed exceptions.
  • Allocate a managed Exception instance and run its constructor. Most likely, this involves looking up resources for the various error messages.
  • Probably take a trip through the OS kernel. Often take a hardware exception.
  • Notify any attached debuggers, profilers, vectored exception handlers and other interested parties.

Now, consider this piece of code:

try{
   Myvar = (myClass) myParameter;
}
catch (Exception ex){
   // do some stuff to handle the exception. 
}

Instead of adding a check for if myParameter is null, you have now caused the application to perform all the tasks listed above, and as a special feature, the application has also thrown an additional 1st chance access violation exception (which it always does on a NullReferenceException) so some of the things above actually happen twice…

Before I go any further, there is another thing that I don’t like about the code sample above. We catch a generic exception, so we don’t actually know if it is a NullReferenceException we are catching, perhaps it needs to be handled another way if it is another type of exception. But, rest assured, it is better than catching exceptions and swallowing them without doing anything in the exception handler.

Exceptions can take you into unnecessary code paths.

I’d like to share a brief story about a case I had a long time back. The customers servers were performing moderately well but they were not completely satisfied and wanted us to identify potential bottlenecks. We attached a debugger and fairly soon it became apparent that they were throwing some exceptions they weren’t aware of. Unluckily for them, because of one of the exceptions they were throwing they ended up calling a function they were not expecting to call. This function went out and did queries to various different services. The check to avoid the exception was really simple and once they added it, low and behold, they increased their throughput by no less than 20 times… you heard it right 20 times, amazing huh?:) Talk about being completely satisfied with their performance after that…

A common example of when throwing an exception can block you, is the case where you have an global exception handler that logs the exception to an eventlog, database or file.

Don’t get me wrong, please do log your exceptions, but… make sure you do something about the exceptions you get. If your application throws 40,000 exceptions in 3 hours and you log these to a database or the eventlog, not only will your logs fill up pretty soon, but you are also likely to get a lot of contention writing to your log. (Especially the eventlog or a file since writing is usually serialized)

Exceptions are generally thrown when something went wrong.

If exceptions are generally thrown when something goes wrong, why do things go wrong so often? In the sample above, if you are expecting the parameter to be null about 20% of the time, perhaps it’s not an exception but rather just one of the cases.

I know we don’t live in a clean room, but a good way of thinking about exceptions is that an exception should only occur in the exceptional case. They shouldn’t be expected, and when they do happen, you should try to take measures to avoid them. Think of try/catch as a safety net rather than a program control feature.

So, now to the good part… here is how you find out how many .net exceptions you are throwing, and why and where…

In performance monitor you can watch the counters:

.NET CLR Exceptions/#Exceps Thrown (total number of exceptions thrown) and
.NET CLR Exceptions/#Exceps Thrown / sec

to get an idea of how many .net exceptions your application is throwing.

There are a few different ways you can figure out what exceptions you are throwing with windbg.exe and which one you choose depends a little bit on if you are in production or in a stress test environment where it doesn’t matter if you break in to the process and stop it for a while.

The different ways I’m going to show are

  1. Attaching and stopping on unmanaged exceptions
  2. Taking a snapshot memory dump and looking at the recent exceptions
  3. Leaving a debugger running and logging exceptions

Attaching and stopping on unmanaged exceptions

For demonstration purposes I have created a webform and simply call

Throw new System.Exception(“Test”)
from Page_Load

With windbg.exe attached to the w3wp.exe process I run

sxe CLR

to make the debugger stop on .net exceptions. Since we are going to examine some managed structures we should load the sos extension (.load clr10\sos) and then hit g for go.

Once we hit the first exception we should see something like this in the debugger window

(15c4.163c): CLR exception - code e0434f4d (first chance)

And we should be stopped on Kernel32!RaiseException since this is where we actually throw the native part of the CLR exception.

At this point we can use the following commands to figure out what our exception is and where it is being thrown

!cen (CheckExceptionName to print the exception type and address)

0:005> !cen
System.Exception (0x642e134)

and !clrstack (to print the managed stack)

0:005> !clrstack
Thread 5
ESP         EIP       
0x0c1bf6e4  0x77e55dea [FRAME: HelperMethodFrame] 
0x0c1bf710  0x0c2e0528 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void ExceptionsAndStuff.WebForm1.Page_Load(Object,Class System.EventArgs)
  at [+0x30] [+0x0] c:\inetpub\wwwroot\exceptionsandstuff\webform1.aspx.cs:21
0x0c1bf728  0x0c3192dc [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void System.Web.UI.Control.OnLoad(Class System.EventArgs)
0x0c1bf738  0x0c319224 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive()
0x0c1bf74c  0x0c3184d7 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain()
0x0c1bf790  0x0c317207 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequest()
0x0c1bf7cc  0x0c316c73 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequest(Class System.Web.HttpContext)
0x0c1bf7d4  0x0c316c4c [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void System.Web.HttpApplication/CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication+IExecutionStep.Execute()
0x0c1bf7e4  0x0c1d98b8 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Class System.Exception System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(Class IExecutionStep,ByRef Boolean)
0x0c1bf82c  0x0c1d9322 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void System.Web.HttpApplication.ResumeSteps(Class System.Exception)
0x0c1bf874  0x0c1d91eb [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Class System.IAsyncResult System.Web.HttpApplication.System.Web.IHttpAsyncHandler.BeginProcessRequest(Class System.Web.HttpContext,Class System.AsyncCallback,Object)
0x0c1bf890  0x01eb6897 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void System.Web.HttpRuntime.ProcessRequestInternal(Class System.Web.HttpWorkerRequest)
0x0c1bf8cc  0x01eb6448 [DEFAULT] Void System.Web.HttpRuntime.ProcessRequest(Class System.Web.HttpWorkerRequest)
0x0c1bf8d8  0x01eb2fc5 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] I4 System.Web.Hosting.ISAPIRuntime.ProcessRequest(I,I4)
0x0c1bf9a0  0x79217188 [FRAME: ContextTransitionFrame] 
0x0c1bfa80  0x79217188 [FRAME: ComMethodFrame]

This shows us that we have thrown an exception of type System.Exception in ExceptionsAndStuff.WebForm1.Page_Load (and since I had debug=true set in web.config we can also see the page name and line number)

To continue debugging hit gn (go not handled)

After the initial exception if I continue I will get two additional exceptions, first a System.Web.HttpUnhandledException in System.UI.Page.HandleError, and then a rethrow of this System.Web.HttpUnhandledException in System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequest. So we can see how this seemingly simple exception just caused me to pass through the exception handlers 3 times.

Debugging Tip!: To make this a bit more automated consider running

sxe -c "!cen;!clrstack;gn" CLR

Which stops on the CLR exception, runs !cen, !clrstack and then continues, so for each exception you will get the type and the call stack in the debugger window.

Taking a snapshot memory dump and looking at the recent exceptions

If you want to look at a production system and you’re throwing enough exceptions that logging in the debugger would slow down the application considerably, you can get a lot of information by taking a hang dump with adplus

adplus -hang –pn <PROCESSNAME.EXE>

With the dump loaded in windbg and with sos.dll loaded, run !dumpallexeptions (or !dae for short), this will show you all exception objects currently on the heap, i.e. all exceptions that have not yet been garbage collected, and should give you an idea of the types of exceptions your application is throwing. !dae gives a statistical view of the exceptions, to see the individual exceptions run !dae –v (verbose mode).

Every time you run !dae you will notice 4 exceptions at the top. The NotSupportedException, ExecutionEngineException, StackOverflowException and OutOfMemoryException. This does not mean that these have been thrown. These exceptions are generated at startup in the case they should be needed since they can not be created at that point. (in other words, ignore these in most cases)

Further down we can see 3 ThreadAbortExceptions in HttpResponse.Redirect/HttpResponse.End and 4 SqlExceptions when trying to fill a dataset.

A redirect will always throw a ThreadAbortException since it needs to stop further execution of the current page, this can be avoided by setting the second parameter of Redirect to false, but then of course the code on the current page will continue running.

0:000> !dae
Number of exceptions of this type:        1
Exception 0x151ce76c in MT 0x79bf44d4: System.NotSupportedException
_message: Specified method is not supported.
-----------------
Number of exceptions of this type:        1
Exception 0x180000bc in MT 0x79b94ee4: System.ExecutionEngineException
-----------------
Number of exceptions of this type:        1
Exception 0x1800007c in MT 0x79b94dac: System.StackOverflowException
-----------------
Number of exceptions of this type:        1
Exception 0x1800003c in MT 0x79b94c74: System.OutOfMemoryException
-----------------
Number of exceptions of this type:        3
Exception 0x28a74114 in MT 0x79bf881c: System.Threading.ThreadAbortException
_message: Thread was being aborted.
_stackTrace: 
0x00000000 
0x00000000 
0x79bb8a00 
0x79a29496 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void System.Threading.Thread.Abort(Object)
0x0e54eec8 
0x79bb8e68 
0x030c28fa [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void System.Web.HttpResponse.End()
0x0e54eecc 
0x0200cbe0 
0x030c2075 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void System.Web.HttpResponse.Redirect(String,Boolean)
0x0e54eee0 
0x0200cab0 
0x02e2c898 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void ExceptionsAndStuff.WebForm1.Page_Load(Object,Class System.EventArgs)
0x0e54eefc 
0x02a4af50 
-----------------
Number of exceptions of this type:        4
Exception 0x077cf420 in MT 0x02b84e9c: System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException
_message: System error.
_stackTrace: 
0x02bf9f18 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Boolean System.Data.SqlClient.SqlDataReader.Read()
0x0dd1ecf4 
0x02b85de8 
0x02fe432f [DEFAULT] [hasThis] I4 System.Data.Common.DbDataAdapter.FillLoadDataRow(Class System.Data.Common.SchemaMapping)
0x0dd1ed60 
0x02e43110 
0x02e2f9cc [DEFAULT] [hasThis] I4 System.Data.Common.DbDataAdapter.FillFromReader(Object,String,Class System.Data.IDataReader,I4,I4,Class System.Data.DataColumn,Object)
0x0dd1ed50 
0x02e430f0 
0x02e2f849 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] I4 System.Data.Common.DbDataAdapter.Fill(Class System.Data.DataSet,String,Class System.Data.IDataReader,I4,I4)
0x0dd1edec 
0x02e430c0 
0x02e2f688 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] I4 System.Data.Common.DbDataAdapter.FillFromCommand(Object,I4,I4,String,Class System.Data.IDbCommand,ValueClass System.Data.CommandBehavior)
0x0dd1edc8 
0x02e430b0 
0x02e2f4d5 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] I4 System.Data.Common.DbDataAdapter.Fill(Class System.Data.DataSet,I4,I4,String,Class System.Data.IDbCommand,ValueClass System.Data.CommandBehavior)
0x0dd1ee60 
0x02e43090 
0x02fe7e96 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] I4 System.Data.Common.DbDataAdapter.Fill(Class System.Data.DataSet)
0x0dd1ee88 
0x02e43060 
0x036ed5f4 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Class System.Data.DataSet ExceptionsAndStuff.DBLib.GetData(I4)
0x0dd1ee94 
0x029ff6d8 



Total 375 exceptions

If we take a look at the SqlException it’s message is System Exception which isn’t terribly helpful. SqlExceptions are a bit special since the actual information is stored in an error object off the exception so the best thing for these is to dump them out separately using the address from the !dae output.

0:000> !dumpobj 0x077cf420 
Name: System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException
MethodTable 0x02b84e9c
EEClass 0x02af9340
Size 68(0x44) bytes
GC Generation: 2
mdToken: 0x020001c4  (c:\windows\assembly\gac\system.data\1.0.5000.0__b77a5c561934e089\system.data.dll)
FieldDesc*: 0x02b84d98
        MT      Field     Offset                 Type       Attr      Value Name


0x79b947ac 0x4000029     0x34         System.Int32   instance 0 _xptrs
0x79b947ac 0x400002a     0x38         System.Int32   instance -532459699 _xcode
0x02b84e9c 0x4000fb5     0x3c                CLASS   instance 0x077cf464 _errors
-----------------
Exception 0x077cf420 in MT 0x02b84e9c: System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException
_message: System error.
_stackTrace: 
0x02bf9f18 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Boolean System.Data.SqlClient.SqlDataReader.Read()


Then dumping out the _errors object and its error object and so on (follow the bolded items… )

0:000> !dumpobj 0x077cf464 
Name: System.Data.SqlClient.SqlErrorCollection
MethodTable 0x02b8500c
EEClass 0x02af93a4
Size 12(0xc) bytes
GC Generation: 2
mdToken: 0x020001c3  (c:\windows\assembly\gac\system.data\1.0.5000.0__b77a5c561934e089\system.data.dll)
FieldDesc*: 0x02b84f2c
        MT      Field     Offset                 Type       Attr      Value Name
0x02b8500c 0x4000fb4      0x4                CLASS   instance 0x077cf470 errors

0:000> !dumpobj 0x077cf470 
Name: System.Collections.ArrayList
MethodTable 0x79ba0d74
EEClass 0x79ba0eb0
Size 24(0x18) bytes
GC Generation: 2
mdToken: 0x020000ff  (c:\windows\microsoft.net\framework\v1.1.4322\mscorlib.dll)
FieldDesc*: 0x79ba0f14
        MT      Field     Offset                 Type       Attr      Value Name
0x79ba0d74 0x400035b      0x4                CLASS   instance 0x077cf488 _items
0x79ba0d74 0x400035c      0xc         System.Int32   instance 1 _size
0x79ba0d74 0x400035d     0x10         System.Int32   instance 1 _version
0x79ba0d74 0x400035e      0x8                CLASS   instance 0x00000000 _syncRoot

0:000> !dumpobj -v 0x077cf488 
Name: System.Object[]
MethodTable 0x01a2209c
EEClass 0x01a22018
Size 80(0x50) bytes
GC Generation: 2
Array: Rank 1, Type CLASS
Element Type: System.Object
Content: 16 items
------ Will only dump out valid managed objects ----
   Address	        MT	Class Name
0x077cf400	0x02b851a4	System.Data.SqlClient.SqlError
----------

0:000> !do 0x077cf400
Name: System.Data.SqlClient.SqlError
MethodTable 0x02b851a4
EEClass 0x02af9408
Size 32(0x20) bytes
GC Generation: 2
mdToken: 0x020001c2  (c:\windows\assembly\gac\system.data\1.0.5000.0__b77a5c561934e089\system.data.dll)
FieldDesc*: 0x02b85090
        MT      Field     Offset                 Type       Attr      Value Name
0x02b851a4 0x4000fad      0x4                CLASS   instance 0x10015bb0 source
0x02b851a4 0x4000fae     0x10         System.Int32   instance 1205 number
0x02b851a4 0x4000faf     0x18          System.Byte   instance 61 state
0x02b851a4 0x4000fb0     0x19          System.Byte   instance 13 errorClass
0x02b851a4 0x4000fb1      0x8                CLASS   instance 0x077cf28c message
0x02b851a4 0x4000fb2      0xc                CLASS   instance 0x077cf3c8 procedure
0x02b851a4 0x4000fb3     0x14         System.Int32   instance 22 lineNumber

0:000> !do 0x077cf28c 
Name: System.String
MethodTable 0x79b925c8
EEClass 0x79b92914
Size 316(0x13c) bytes
GC Generation: 2
mdToken: 0x0200000f  (c:\windows\microsoft.net\framework\v1.1.4322\mscorlib.dll)
String: Transaction (Process ID 104) was deadlocked on lock resources with another process and has been chosen as the deadlock victim. Rerun the transaction.
FieldDesc*: 0x79b92978
        MT      Field     Offset                 Type       Attr      Value Name
0x79b925c8 0x4000013      0x4         System.Int32   instance 150 m_arrayLength
0x79b925c8 0x4000014      0x8         System.Int32   instance 149 m_stringLength
0x79b925c8 0x4000015      0xc          System.Char   instance 0x54 m_firstChar
0x79b925c8 0x4000016        0                CLASS     shared   static Empty
    >> Domain:Value 0x000abfc8:0x18000224 0x00163890:0x18000224 <<
0x79b925c8 0x4000017      0x4                CLASS     shared   static WhitespaceChars
    >> Domain:Value 0x000abfc8:0x18000238 0x00163890:0x14005924 <<

As you can see there is plenty more information here you can gather, such as the stored procedure name etc. but I’ll leave those out since you can get them by simply running !dumpobj on the addresses.

Now, let’s say that you get a NullReferenceException in a function and you don’t really know where in the function you are or what could be null.

0:000> !dumpobj 0x3d86c980 
Name: System.NullReferenceException

-----------------
Exception 0x3d86c980 in MT 0x79c04e64: System.NullReferenceException
_message: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
_stackTrace: 
0x2fa0536b [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void ExceptionsAndStuff.WebForm1. btnAdd_Click(Object,Class System.EventArgs)
0x0c10f844 
0x0f64be20 
0x189b51ec [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void System.Web.UI.WebControls.LinkButton.OnClick(Class System.EventArgs)
0x0c10f854 
0x0e124f00 
0x189b4f72 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void System.Web.UI.WebControls.LinkButton.System.Web.UI.IPostBackEventHandler.RaisePostBackEvent(String)
0x0c10f868 
0x0e124f60 
0x189b4f22 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void System.Web.UI.Page.RaisePostBackEvent(Class System.Web.UI.IPostBackEventHandler,String)
0x0c10f878 
0x0c2a1308 
0x189b4eea [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void System.Web.UI.Page.RaisePostBackEvent(Class System.Collections.Specialized.NameValueCollection)
0x0c10f880 
0x0c2a12f8 
0x10920612 [DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain()
0x0c10f890 
0x0c2a14d8

The top address on the stack trace will show exactly where we are at in the code (of btnAdd_Click in this case) so we can run !u to disassemble the function and see what it is doing at that location.

0:000> !u 0x2fa0536b 
Will print '>>> ' at address: 0x2fa0536b
Normal JIT generated code
[DEFAULT] [hasThis] Void ExceptionsAndStuff.WebForm1.btnAdd_Click (Object,Class System.EventArgs)
Begin 0x2fa05358, size 0x9d
2fa05358 57               push    edi
2fa05359 56               push    esi
2fa0535a 8bf1             mov     esi,ecx
2fa0535c 8b8e68010000     mov     ecx,[esi+0x168]
2fa05362 3909             cmp     [ecx],ecx
2fa05364 e8cf4313f7       call    26b39738 (System.Web.UI.HtmlControls.HtmlInputFile.get_PostedFile)
2fa05369 8bc8             mov     ecx,eax
>>> 2fa0536b 3909             cmp     [ecx],ecx
2fa0536d e8464613f7       call    26b399b8 (System.Web.HttpPostedFile.get_ContentLength)
2fa05372 3b053c8b640f     cmp     eax,[0f648b3c]
2fa05378 7e04             jle     2fa0537e
2fa0537a 33c0             xor     eax,eax
2fa0537c eb05             jmp     2fa05383
2fa0537e b801000000       mov     eax,0x1
2fa05383 25ff000000       and     eax,0xff
2fa05388 7448             jz      2fa053d2
2fa0538a 8bbe68010000     mov     edi,[esi+0x168]
2fa05390 8b8e98010000     mov     ecx,[esi+0x198]
2fa05396 8b01             mov     eax,[ecx]
2fa05398 ff90c4010000     call    dword ptr [eax+0x1c4]
2fa0539e 50               push    eax
2fa0539f 6aff             push    0xff
2fa053a1 8bd7             mov     edx,edi
2fa053a3 8bce             mov     ecx,esi
2fa053a5 ff1520c1640f     call    dword ptr [0f64c120] 
…

From this we can see that we have called the get method of the PostedFile property on an HtmlInputFile object, then we moved eax into ecx (eax normally contains the returnvalue from a function), and we are comparing it with itself de-referenced, and then we get an exception. You don’t really need to understand all of the assembly, it’s sufficient to look at the big pieces and conclude that likely PostedFile is null and we NullReference when we try to access ContentLength (which is the next thing we see in the code). Since you probably have the code for the function it’s even easier. So from here, just add a check for null on the PostedFile before using it and you’re good to go.

Leaving a debugger running and logging exceptions

I have shown you one way of leaving the debugger running and logging inside the debugger itself, but sometimes it’s convenient to do in a script since it might be your web admin or someone that needs to run this.

Create a config file called TrackCLR.cfg with the following contents

<ADPLUS>
  <SETTINGS>
   <RUNMODE>CRASH</RUNMODE>
  </SETTINGS>
  <PRECOMMANDS>
   <CMD>!load clr10\sos</CMD>
  </PRECOMMANDS>
  <EXCEPTIONS>
   <OPTION>NoDumpOnFirstChance</OPTION>
   <OPTION>NoDumpOnSecondChance</OPTION>
   <CONFIG><!-- This is for the CLR exception -->
    <CODE>clr</CODE>
    <ACTIONS1>Log</ACTIONS1>
    <CUSTOMACTIONS1>!cen;!clrstack;gn </CUSTOMACTIONS1>
    <RETURNACTION1>GN</RETURNACTION1>
   </CONFIG>
  </EXCEPTIONS>
</ADPLUS>

And run adplus –pn myprocess.exe –c TrackCLR.cfg

This will generate a log file in a folder under the debuggers directory with managed stacks and exception types for each .net exception.

Or you can even take it one step further and create a dump when a specific exception occurs for example using this config file.

<ADPLUS>
  <SETTINGS>
   <RUNMODE>CRASH </RUNMODE>
  </SETTINGS>
  <PRECOMMANDS>
   <CMD>!load clr10\sos </CMD>
  </PRECOMMANDS>
  <EXCEPTIONS>
   <OPTION>NoDumpOnFirstChance </OPTION>
   <OPTION>NoDumpOnSecondChance </OPTION>
   <CONFIG><!-- This is for the CLR exception -->
    <CODE>clr </CODE>
    <ACTIONS1>Log </ACTIONS1>
    <CUSTOMACTIONS1>!clr10\sos.cce System.InvalidOperationException 1; j ($t1 = 1) '.dump /ma /u c:\temp_dumps\exceptiondump.dmp;gn' ; 'gn' </CUSTOMACTIONS1>
    <RETURNACTION1>GN </RETURNACTION1>
    <ACTIONS2>Void </ACTIONS2>
    <RETURNACTION2>GN </RETURNACTION2>
   </CONFIG>
  </EXCEPTIONS>
</ADPLUS>

The cce (CheckCurrentException) command will set the registry $t1 to 1 or 0 depending on if the CLR exception matches the type you specified. (The 1 passed in as the second argument to cce specifies that we want register t1 and you can choose either t1 or t0 here)

j ($t1 = 1) is an if statement, so this will dump if register $t1 is set to 1, and otherwise just go.

Happy hunting…

-- All rules have exceptions, except the ones that don’t.  





  • Is there an alternative to using !dae for framework version 2.0?  

    It's really pissing me off that framework 2.0 has been out forever now and most of the really useful commands available in sos.dll for 1.1 are not available for 2.0.  It's making my life very difficult as all of our apps are on 2.0.

  • Hi Scott,

    The best alternative is !dumpheap -type Exception or !dumpheap -type *Exception to dump out all .net exceptions.

    You could also do something like

    .foreach (ex {!dumpheap -type Exception -short}){!pe ${ex}}  if you want to list them all with stacks...

    /Tess

  • Wow, that was fast!  Yeah, that is basically what I have been doing.

    Is there any word on when sos.dll might be updated to have the old functionality again?

    I've been trying to track down a particularly nasty problem that has been manifesting itself as an intermittent threadabort exception in one of our production environments. I suspect the underlying error is something different that just happens to be resulting in a threadabort.

    We can't consistently reproduce it unfortunately.

  • Also the exceptions in my dump don't seem to have stack traces which is not helping...

    Another random question for you.... When I left ADPlus attached to the IIS process in QUIET mode to catch ThreadAbort exceptions an end user of the website got a dialog from the browser informing her that a memory dump was occurring.  

    Is this normal?  Is there a way we can prevent that from happening?

  • sos won't really help you with the fact that they don't have the stacktraces populated:)  but that is something you see often for threadaborts when they are due to timeouts or appdomain/process shutdowns.

    Only time i've ever seen a stack for a threaabort is the threadaborts that you get from using Response.Redirect where it aborts the current request to avoid running the rest of the page.

    I can't say when a certain method will be implemented in sos.  Basically the issue is that it is not a straight port because of the changes between debugging .net in 1.1 and 2.0 but sos is constantly being updated.

    I can't say why the end user got the messagebox in the browser, to be honest that sounds really really weird to me.  It is not somehting that adplus/windbg will do so either it has to be something in the app itself or maybe a jit-debugging box because of a timeout in the browser or something...  

  • There were actually some other exceptions in the dump besides the threadabort and none of them had stack traces. Could that be a result of something I'm doing incorrectly when capturing the dumps?

    The problem we've got is that we we can not reproduce the issue with any frequency. When it happens the error that is getting reported to the users is a ThreadAbort as the result of a response.redirect, however no part of the process they are executing at the time they see the error is executing a redirect. This makes me think that somehow this error is masking the real underlying error. There have been no entries in the windows eventlog for app/process shutdowns or timeouts at the time the errors have occurred.

    Do you have any advice for what might be the best approach to try and find the source of a problem like this?

  • Hello All, Just recently I came across an incident on which a customer saw the following exception in

  • Amazing post!.

    I'm receiving a "Doesn't work with 2.x" when I try to run !cen or something like that. Any ideas?

    Thanks!

  • !cen doesnt exist in the 2.0 version of sos,  there is a config file in the comments of this post that you might be able to use instead.  For just looking at an exception use !pe instead of !cen

  • Fine post...

    confirms my opionion that throwing exceptions on any and every issue seems not the good practice as it ist always taught, and that the old- fashioned style to check on known issues before relaying on getting an exception (I coded a lot in C) is still up to date.

    thanks!

  • Stephan - in .NET, exceptions are vitally important, but (as you implied) should not be abused. The .NET Framework Design Guidelines book provides ample guidance on when exceptions should and shouldn't be used.

    The general rule of thumb is that if a given method is unable to complete the task that its name implies, it should throw an appropriate exception.

    For example, if File.Open() can't find/open the requested file, it should throw. If CustomerList.AddNewCustomer(...) can't add a new customer, it should throw. etc.

    The alternative is a return to the Win32/VB way of doing things - having to check the outcome of every method call each and every time you call them!

    Exceptions should reflect a perspective that, from the called method's perspective, it is unable to complete it's action and doesn't know what to do next.

    If you have a method that is quite likely to fail, consider using the bool Try<verb><adjective>(...) patterm that returns a bool result but which is also called by the <verb><adjective>(...) method that throws if the Try...() version fails. This way, if you're expecting the operation to fail, you can call the Try...() variation and test the result, but otherwise, call the non-try version and catch exceptions where you're able to back-out of the operation cleanly.

  • The original post is specious.

    We, the general developer community, didn't encode hundreds or thousands of exceptions that occur over the course of a regular application.  Microsoft did.  Microsoft's .NET architect(s) created the framework to throw exceptions instead of return result codes or the like, adding even more overhead to the normal operation of a program.

    I have *not* thrown over 40,000 exceptions.  .NET did.  Microsoft did.  Don't blame us for a poor architectural choice.

    As Richard Turner put it in the previous comment, "The general rule of thumb is that if a given method is unable to complete the task that its name implies, it should throw an appropriate exception."

    Even more specious, Turner says, "The alternative is a return to the Win32/VB way of doing things - having to check the outcome of every method call each and every time you call them!"

    As opposed to, say, using a try/catch block around every call into .NET?  Other than the extreme overhead of using exceptions for normal operating conditions, and the syntax differences between testing error codes versus testing caught exceptions, what's the difference?  Give me a good return code any day.

    Oh, wait, there's a better way?  "If you have a method that is quite likely to fail, consider using the bool Try<verb><adjective>(...) patterm..."  *sigh*  That's not the actual pattern (<adjective> is probably better served by <property> or <noun>, for example), but nevertheless, it just complicates the API.  Now, every operation hopefully has two different calls, one for the exceptioned version, and another for the test version.  Either way, I have extra, unnecessary overhead.

    The sad thing is that so many Microsoft engineers know why using exceptions is a bad thing, yet somehow this managed to slip into .NET in spite of them.  Architecture review, anyone?

  • The core of the problem is that 98% or developers have no clue what the difference is between an error and an exception.  Note that I'm not referring to anyone in these responses - just in general.  This is based on my experience in Consulting for 15 years.  Some treat exceptions as errors and others treat errors as exceptions.  You have to have clear architectural guidelines when developing a Framework that define an error and an exception, when to use each, and how the application should react under each scenario.

    A trivial example of an error is entering alphabetic characters in a US phone number field.  Ok, so it's a *user* error but you get what I mean.  An exceptional case is an "OutOfMemory" exception.  Possibly a network timeout, SQL Server problem, etc.

    With regard to the comment made by CullisonX about wrapping .NET Framwork calls with TRY/CATCH blocks is hopefully facetious.  You never use a TRY/CATCH in a method unless the method cannot continue in an exceptional scenario, needs to do some cleanup, can possibly recover from, or add additional information to the exception such as the state of the data or values when the exception occurred.  In other words, don't use TRY/CATCH design IF you EXPECT something could very well fail.  This should be treated as an error instead.

    In other words, you only use TRY/CATCH if the local method  cares about it.  Otherwise, you add program overhead just by adding the TRY/CATCH blocks - and especially if you CATCH exceptions and do nothing with them in the place where the CATCH is.

    A good Architect, Tech Lead, etc. and Code Reviews should catch this and put the "Kaibash" on it!

  • I don't care who ya are - that's just specious.

  • Hello,

    Excellent post - thank you!  I am currently debugging a rather large Visual Basic 6 application (EXE is about 30 Meg) that is doing exactly what you're talking about - I've just started watching the application using WinDbg and am seeing "Unknown exception - code c000008f (first chance)" occurrences rolling in almost constantly.

    Since this is unmanaged VB6 code, is it possible to eliminate these sorts of exceptions or are these happening under the sheets of VB6?  I have yet to get the pdb file for the app, but I guess I'm just curious as to what I'll find at the heart of all of these exceptions, if anything!  Will these point to VB error handlers or something inside of VB6 itself?

    Furthermore, is WinDbg really the right tool to do this sort of analysis?  We've run the application inside the VB environment enough to know that this is no simple problem with a few lines of code.  Something is happening behind the scenes that leads to a problem further on down the line at seemingly random locations, specifically Event ID 1000 Application Errors with no Category and no Faulting Module, or similarly vague reports including the application simply disappearing.

    Any help or advice you could provide would be greatly appreciated!

    Thanks.

Page 3 of 4 (51 items) 1234
Leave a Comment
  • Please add 6 and 7 and type the answer here:
  • Post