[JBoss JIRA] Created: (JBREM-877) New Socket Connection is being Created for Every Client Request to the Server
by Kumarselvan Somasundaram (JIRA)
New Socket Connection is being Created for Every Client Request to the Server
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: JBREM-877
URL: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBREM-877
Project: JBoss Remoting
Issue Type: Bug
Security Level: Public (Everyone can see)
Components: transport
Affects Versions: 2.2.2.SP2
Environment: Linux os , Pentium duo Processor with 3.6 Ghz clock Speed, 4GB Ram in this Postgresql Database also Running
Reporter: Kumarselvan Somasundaram
Priority: Critical
whenever EJB3 client requests the Server new socket is being created. at the client side the socket connection pool is not being used. Hope there is some issue with the socket connection after getting response from the server,becoz of which the server side the connection is being closed. this increases the CPU utilization,
The same code is running fine in jboss 4.0.4 with jboss remoting 1.4.0
new remoting 2.2.2 SP4 only handling 1/4 of the load with high CPU utilization.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
18 years, 4 months
[JBoss JIRA] Created: (JBMICROCONT-223) Package handling not working properly in new classloader
by Adrian Brock (JIRA)
Package handling not working properly in new classloader
--------------------------------------------------------
Key: JBMICROCONT-223
URL: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBMICROCONT-223
Project: JBoss MicroContainer
Issue Type: Bug
Components: General
Affects Versions: JBossMC-2.0.0.Beta7
Reporter: Adrian Brock
Assigned To: Adrian Brock
Fix For: JBossMC-2.0.0.CR1
The package handling is not working properly in the new classloader.
1) In the new classloader each classloader has no parent (unlike the old UnifiedClassLoader - UCL).
Instead the parent is a Loader. This means that packages in the parent (e.g. the classpath) are not visible
2) In both the old and new classloader, packages are not retrieved across the peers
this means that each classloader gets its own package object.
This means that package sealing does not work.
3) Since the sealing check is in the URLClassLoader, the new classloader is not performing
this check - it uses the SecureClassLoader
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
18 years, 4 months
[JBoss JIRA] Created: (JBMICROCONT-229) AbstractBeanInfoFactory throws StringIndexOutOfBoundsException for short method names
by Brian Stansberry (JIRA)
AbstractBeanInfoFactory throws StringIndexOutOfBoundsException for short method names
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: JBMICROCONT-229
URL: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBMICROCONT-229
Project: JBoss MicroContainer
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Container
Affects Versions: JBossMC-2.0.0.Beta7
Reporter: Brian Stansberry
Creating a bean of a type that contains a method whose name is 2 chars or less results in the following:
java.lang.StringIndexOutOfBoundsException: String index out of range: -1
at java.lang.String.substring(String.java:1768)
at java.lang.String.substring(String.java:1735)
at org.jboss.beans.info.plugins.AbstractBeanInfoFactory.getUpperPropertyName(AbstractBeanInfoFactory.java:93)
at org.jboss.beans.info.plugins.AbstractBeanInfoFactory.getBeanProperties(AbstractBeanInfoFactory.java:234)
at org.jboss.beans.info.plugins.AbstractBeanInfoFactory.getBeanInfo(AbstractBeanInfoFactory.java:141)
at org.jboss.config.plugins.AbstractConfiguration.getBeanInfo(AbstractConfiguration.java:71)
at org.jboss.kernel.plugins.config.AbstractKernelConfig.getBeanInfo(AbstractKernelConfig.java:55)
at org.jboss.kernel.plugins.config.AbstractKernelConfigurator.getBeanInfo(AbstractKernelConfigurator.java:65)
at org.jboss.kernel.plugins.config.AbstractKernelConfigurator.getBeanInfo(AbstractKernelConfigurator.java:84)
at org.jboss.kernel.plugins.dependency.PreInstallAction.installActionInternal(PreInstallAction.java:62)
at org.jboss.kernel.plugins.dependency.KernelControllerContextAction.installAction(KernelControllerContextAction.java:135)
at org.jboss.kernel.plugins.dependency.KernelControllerContextAction.installAction(KernelControllerContextAction.java:46)
at org.jboss.dependency.plugins.action.SimpleControllerContextAction.simpleInstallAction(SimpleControllerContextAction.java:62)
at org.jboss.dependency.plugins.action.AccessControllerContextAction.install(AccessControllerContextAction.java:71)
at org.jboss.dependency.plugins.AbstractControllerContextActions.install(AbstractControllerContextActions.java:51)
at org.jboss.dependency.plugins.AbstractControllerContext.install(AbstractControllerContext.java:327)
at org.jboss.dependency.plugins.AbstractController.install(AbstractController.java:1309)
at org.jboss.dependency.plugins.AbstractController.incrementState(AbstractController.java:734)
at org.jboss.dependency.plugins.AbstractController.resolveContexts(AbstractController.java:862)
at org.jboss.dependency.plugins.AbstractController.resolveContexts(AbstractController.java:784)
at org.jboss.dependency.plugins.AbstractController.install(AbstractController.java:574)
at org.jboss.dependency.plugins.AbstractController.install(AbstractController.java:398)
at org.jboss.deployers.vfs.deployer.kernel.BeanMetaDataDeployer.deploy(BeanMetaDataDeployer.java:69)
...
This is from attempt to create an instance of org.jgroups.JChannel, which includes a method named up().
Problem is in AbstractBeanInfoFactory:
protected static String getUpperPropertyName(String name)
{
int start = 3;
if (name.startsWith("is"))
start = 2;
return name.substring(start);
}
A simple fix is to make the first line
int start = Math.min(3, name.length);
which will result in a return value of "" from name.substring(start) if name is 3 chars or less.
Alternatively, change getBeanProperties() to not call getUpperPropertyName() until it has already determined the method is a getter or a setter.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
18 years, 4 months
[JBoss JIRA] Created: (JGRP-668) Deadlock condition in BARRIER
by Bela Ban (JIRA)
Deadlock condition in BARRIER
-----------------------------
Key: JGRP-668
URL: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JGRP-668
Project: JGroups
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Bela Ban
Assigned To: Bela Ban
Fix For: 2.7
Hey Bela et al:
We've been fighting a lossy network (UDP receive errors) on a cluster of 50
machines and managed to produce 2 coordinators who refused to MERGE3. A
closer examination reviewed
http://www.nabble.com/file/p14991972/barrier_deadlock.txt this stack trace
which showed that there was one thread trying to satisfy a STATE_REQ msg
blocked down in BARRIER.closeBarrier() waiting for the in_flight_threads to
empty, another thread was trying to service another STATE_REQ and was
blocked trying to lock the state_requesters table up in
STATE_TRANSFER.handleStateReq(), and another 12 threads blocked waiting for
the barrier to open in BARRIER.up().
We quickly found that we had a deadlock condition in BARRIER that was
problematic -- http://www.nabble.com/file/p14991972/BARRIER.java.patch
here's the patch to fix this . However, we cannot see an easy way to fix 2
STATE_REQ messages coming right after the other. They will both enter the
in_flight_threads set and only one will come back down to lock the barrier
and will wait forever for the other one to leave in_flight_threads. If we
let the 2nd come down too, it may come back up before the in_flight_threads
is clear since all it does is see that the barrer is closed and returns.
Although we may have fixed part of the deadlock we saw, we are looking into
switching to the FLUSH protocol instead because of the 2 STATE_REQ issue.
Just curious as to other's feedback about this issue and whether more folks
are using FLUSH or BARRIER?
Thanks much for an [otherwise] great code stack. We are excited to be using
it in our distributed database system project.
gray
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
18 years, 4 months