January 2009 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: LargeMessage & Failover Update

by clebert.suconic＠jboss.com

anonymous wrote : | I'm not sure what do you mean by "called largeMessageDeliver.deliver() synchronously" When replicating, the main method is not waiting deliver to finish and continuing its execution, hence asynchronous per definition. When non replicating, the main is waiting deliver to finish, the main execution of the method is dependent on deliver finish, hence synchronous per definition. The method deliverLargeMessage will return before largeMessageDeliver.deliver finished, as the method will be running on another thread. Credits are arriving before the deliverLargeMessage was finished, hence the wrong order. The credits are arriving before the process finished which would be the natural order. The correct order of credits is: LargeMessageDeliver.deliverBegins: - deliver LargeMessageHeader while (credits) { - deliver LargeMessageChunks } creditsArriving *should arrive* after LargeMessageDeliver was finished. This is happening because the ServerPacketHandler is not locked, and being able to be receive CreditPackets as the chunks are being sent to the client. We would need to lock the credit receiving somehow until deliverLargeMessage is finished, but waiting the execution to finish would give you that lock naturally. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4202120#4202120 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4202120

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Plague of temp VFS files and OOM on redeploy

by richard.opalka＠jboss.com

And how does your commit look like? 1.) | @Override | public void cleanup() | { | try | { | super.cleanup(); | } | finally | { | root.cleanup(); | } | } | or 2.) | @Override | public void cleanup() | { | try | { | root.cleanup(); | } | finally | { | super.cleanup(); | } | } | I'm asking because first approach is error prone (from maintainability point of view). Seems we're starting to play catching game. I don't want to;) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4202114#4202114 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4202114

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: WARN logs in InterceptorRegistry

by jaikiran

Workaround, if you want to avoid those logs from showing up: <category name="org.jboss.ejb3.interceptors.registry.InterceptorRegistry"> | <priority value="ERROR"></priority> | </category> in your jboss-log4j.xml View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4202100#4202100 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4202100

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: WARN logs in InterceptorRegistry

by lutz.vahl

something new..? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4202093#4202093 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4202093

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: EJBTHREE-1669 : @Service tutorial on JBoss-5.0 GA

by jaikiran

FYI - The "service" as well as "service_deployment_descriptor" tutorials both are now working against 5.0 GA as well as AS5.x branch after patching through the plugin. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4202074#4202074 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4202074

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Plague of temp VFS files and OOM on redeploy

by alesj

"richard.opalka(a)jboss.com" wrote : | Always call super.cleanup() style methods finally! | You mean the order or try/finally block? If the 2nd, it's not always true. ;-) Imagine having a lot of things to call at cleanup, you might end up with loads of try/finally's. It's then better to 'enforce' a strict contract of suppressing exceptions in the actual sub-cleanup methods. And that's exactly what we do here. But, since it's only a single sub-cleanup call, I'll put it in try/finally (I actually already did this :-). The order doesn't matter. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4202063#4202063 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4202063

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: LargeMessage & Failover Update

by timfox

"clebert.suconic(a)jboss.com" wrote : - If we wait the replicatePacket to finish, largeMessageDeliver.deliver will be done asynchronously | | | | | private void deliverLargeMessage(final MessageReference ref, final ServerMessage message) | | { | | ..... | | | | | | if (!replicating) | | largeMessageDeliver.deliver(); // synchronous call when not replicating | | | | else | | result.setResultRunner(new Runnable() // asynchronous call when replicating | | { | | public void run() | | { | | largeMessageDeliverer.deliver(); | | } | | | | }); | | } | | | | | - the method doHandle which is calling deliverLargeMessage, will return immediately, while the server is still deliveringChunks to the client. | | (promptDelivery BTW will try to send another message to the consumer, but it will be rejected as BUSY) | | | - As the ServerSessionPacketHandler is free, credits will arrive concurrently with the delivery to the client, instead of coming after the method deliver returned. This following logic on receiveCredits will not work: | | | | public void receiveCredits(final int credits) throws Exception | | { | | if (credits == -1) | | { | | // No flow control | | availableCredits = null; | | } | | else | | { | | int previous = availableCredits.getAndAdd(credits); | | | | if (previous <= 0 && previous + credits > 0) | | { | | promptDelivery(); // this is what would resume the delivery of the largeMessage | | } | | } | | } | | | | | - because of the credits coming on a different order than how they would usually come, | The order the the credits arrive on the server should be the same. How is this different? The only way the credits could arrive in a different order on the server is if the client sent them in a different order. How is this the case? I think it needs more explanation.... anonymous wrote : | the delivery of messages is interrupted. We will get the credit before they became negative.. so nothing will resume delivery. | | If we called largeMessageDeliver.deliver() synchronously the credits would only arrive at the right time and the resume would work without any problem. | I'm not sure what do you mean by "called largeMessageDeliver.deliver() synchronously" View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4202059#4202059 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4202059

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Plague of temp VFS files and OOM on redeploy

by richard.opalka＠jboss.com

"alesj" wrote : | | | @Override | | public void cleanup() | | { | | super.cleanup(); | | root.cleanup(); | | } | | | I've tried this and it works. :-) | Always call super.cleanup() style methods finally! View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4202035#4202035 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4202035

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: servlet transport implementation

by ataylor

anonymous wrote : http-tunnel, named after stunnel (http://www.stunnel.org/ ). WDYT? sounds good, I'll get it created anonymous wrote : Please put watches on them and leave comments there to continue the discussion. All comments will be forwarded to netty-dev(a)lists.jboss.org. no probs View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4202033#4202033 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4202033

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: Incompatible change to JBossASKernel

by ALRubinger

"ALRubinger" wrote : * Reverted the changes made to JBossASKernel to put it back to state used in AS 5.0.0.GA (Branch_5_x only) I did this in Branch_5_0 in r82895 as well. Too many branches now. :) S, ALR View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4202011#4202011 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4202011

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums January 2009