[JBoss JIRA] (WFLY-3055) Ability to configure a prefix to the domain server launch command
by David Lloyd (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-3055?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
David Lloyd commented on WFLY-3055:
-----------------------------------
* Locking a process to a core or cores: {{taskset 0x0030 ...}}
* Managing process priority: {{nice -n -5 ...}}
It would be nice if we could do it close to the way I originally suggested back 3-4 years ago or whatever it was, and have knowledge of how to control various JVMs and various OSes to accomplish common tasks in a platform-independent way, but at least having a generic capability is something.
> Ability to configure a prefix to the domain server launch command
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WFLY-3055
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-3055
> Project: WildFly
> Issue Type: Feature Request
> Security Level: Public(Everyone can see)
> Components: Domain Management
> Reporter: Brian Stansberry
> Assignee: John O'Hara
> Fix For: 9.0.0.CR1
>
>
> Ability to configure a prefix to the 'java' command used to launch a domain server. This would be a general purpose feature but some intended uses we'd want to make sure work include:
> 1) NUMA settings, e.g.
> numactl --membind 0 --cpubind 0
> 2) Having the server process run under a different user, e.g.
> sudo joe
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
12 years, 4 months
[JBoss JIRA] (WFLY-3055) Ability to configure a prefix to the domain server launch command
by Brian Stansberry (JIRA)
Brian Stansberry created WFLY-3055:
--------------------------------------
Summary: Ability to configure a prefix to the domain server launch command
Key: WFLY-3055
URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-3055
Project: WildFly
Issue Type: Feature Request
Security Level: Public (Everyone can see)
Components: Domain Management
Reporter: Brian Stansberry
Assignee: John O'Hara
Fix For: 9.0.0.CR1
Ability to configure a prefix to the 'java' command used to launch a domain server. This would be a general purpose feature but some intended uses we'd want to make sure work include:
1) NUMA settings, e.g.
numactl --membind 0 --cpubind 0
2) Having the server process run under a different user, e.g.
sudo joe
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
12 years, 4 months
[JBoss JIRA] (WFLY-3054) getPlatformMBeanServer behaves badly when called from premain class such as jmxetric
by dpocock (JIRA)
dpocock created WFLY-3054:
-----------------------------
Summary: getPlatformMBeanServer behaves badly when called from premain class such as jmxetric
Key: WFLY-3054
URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-3054
Project: WildFly
Issue Type: Bug
Security Level: Public (Everyone can see)
Components: JMX
Affects Versions: JBoss AS7 7.1.1.Final
Reporter: dpocock
Assignee: Kabir Khan
JMXetric is a management agent JAR loaded using the JVM argument
java -javaagent:$JARLIBS/jmxetric-1.0.2.jar .....
In the premain method (executed before JBoss main() is invoked), jmxetric calls the static method:
ManagementFactory.getPlatformMBeanServer()
This puts JMX into a bad state and the jboss.as tree is completely missing when browsed with jconsole
As a workaround, jmxetric will defer the call to ManagementFactory.getPlatformMBeanServer() using the "initialdelay" parameter set to a value such as 20 seconds.
However, it would be good if JBoss could act more cleanly in this situation, for example, throwing an exception if ManagementFactory.getPlatformMBeanServer() is called too early, or finding a way to add the "jboss.as" stuff later.
The 1.0.6 release of jmxetric will include the workaround by default. The bug can be reproduced by setting initialdelay="0" in the sample jmxetric.xml or using jmxetric 1.0.5
jmxetric versions before 1.0.5 suffer from issues with the jboss logger as discussed in WFLY-895, so this issue was only discovered after removing the logging statements from jmxetric.
Also covered in jmxetric github:
https://github.com/ganglia/jmxetric/issues/9
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
12 years, 4 months
[JBoss JIRA] (WFLY-3054) getPlatformMBeanServer behaves badly when called from premain class such as jmxetric
by Tomaz Cerar (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-3054?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Tomaz Cerar updated WFLY-3054:
------------------------------
Issue Type: Enhancement (was: Bug)
> getPlatformMBeanServer behaves badly when called from premain class such as jmxetric
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WFLY-3054
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-3054
> Project: WildFly
> Issue Type: Enhancement
> Security Level: Public(Everyone can see)
> Components: JMX
> Affects Versions: JBoss AS7 7.1.1.Final
> Reporter: dpocock
> Assignee: Kabir Khan
> Labels: jboss
>
> JMXetric is a management agent JAR loaded using the JVM argument
> java -javaagent:$JARLIBS/jmxetric-1.0.2.jar .....
> In the premain method (executed before JBoss main() is invoked), jmxetric calls the static method:
> ManagementFactory.getPlatformMBeanServer()
> This puts JMX into a bad state and the jboss.as tree is completely missing when browsed with jconsole
> As a workaround, jmxetric will defer the call to ManagementFactory.getPlatformMBeanServer() using the "initialdelay" parameter set to a value such as 20 seconds.
> However, it would be good if JBoss could act more cleanly in this situation, for example, throwing an exception if ManagementFactory.getPlatformMBeanServer() is called too early, or finding a way to add the "jboss.as" stuff later.
> The 1.0.6 release of jmxetric will include the workaround by default. The bug can be reproduced by setting initialdelay="0" in the sample jmxetric.xml or using jmxetric 1.0.5
> jmxetric versions before 1.0.5 suffer from issues with the jboss logger as discussed in WFLY-895, so this issue was only discovered after removing the logging statements from jmxetric.
> Also covered in jmxetric github:
> https://github.com/ganglia/jmxetric/issues/9
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
12 years, 4 months
[JBoss JIRA] (WFLY-3054) getPlatformMBeanServer behaves badly when called from premain class such as jmxetric
by Tomaz Cerar (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-3054?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Tomaz Cerar commented on WFLY-3054:
-----------------------------------
Can you reproduce the same problem on WildFly 8?
> getPlatformMBeanServer behaves badly when called from premain class such as jmxetric
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WFLY-3054
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-3054
> Project: WildFly
> Issue Type: Enhancement
> Security Level: Public(Everyone can see)
> Components: JMX
> Affects Versions: JBoss AS7 7.1.1.Final
> Reporter: dpocock
> Assignee: Kabir Khan
> Labels: jboss
>
> JMXetric is a management agent JAR loaded using the JVM argument
> java -javaagent:$JARLIBS/jmxetric-1.0.2.jar .....
> In the premain method (executed before JBoss main() is invoked), jmxetric calls the static method:
> ManagementFactory.getPlatformMBeanServer()
> This puts JMX into a bad state and the jboss.as tree is completely missing when browsed with jconsole
> As a workaround, jmxetric will defer the call to ManagementFactory.getPlatformMBeanServer() using the "initialdelay" parameter set to a value such as 20 seconds.
> However, it would be good if JBoss could act more cleanly in this situation, for example, throwing an exception if ManagementFactory.getPlatformMBeanServer() is called too early, or finding a way to add the "jboss.as" stuff later.
> The 1.0.6 release of jmxetric will include the workaround by default. The bug can be reproduced by setting initialdelay="0" in the sample jmxetric.xml or using jmxetric 1.0.5
> jmxetric versions before 1.0.5 suffer from issues with the jboss logger as discussed in WFLY-895, so this issue was only discovered after removing the logging statements from jmxetric.
> Also covered in jmxetric github:
> https://github.com/ganglia/jmxetric/issues/9
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
12 years, 4 months
[JBoss JIRA] (JGRP-1785) TOA, inconsistent message delivery
by Bela Ban (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1785?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Bela Ban commented on JGRP-1785:
--------------------------------
Thanks, applied your PR. Ryan, can you confirm this fixes your problem and then resolve the issue ?
Cheers,
> TOA, inconsistent message delivery
> ----------------------------------
>
> Key: JGRP-1785
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1785
> Project: JGroups
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 3.5
> Environment: Fedora release 17 (Beefy Miracle)
> Reporter: Ryan Emerson
> Assignee: Pedro Ruivo
> Fix For: 3.5
>
>
> When sending total order messages between two nodes, for a prolonged period of time, an inconsistency is encountered when comparing each node's total order of messages.
> I believe this issue is related to how sequence numbers are handled in the implementation, not the protocol itself. I appreciate that TOA is designed for environments where the subset of destinations in the network varies, however I have been unable to reproduce this error when the total number of nodes is > 2. It is still possible that this inconsistency may occur after a large amount of time when the number of nodes is > 2.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
12 years, 4 months
[JBoss JIRA] (JGRP-1785) TOA, inconsistent message delivery
by Pedro Ruivo (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1785?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Pedro Ruivo commented on JGRP-1785:
-----------------------------------
I don't know if I don't have permissions or something similar, but I'm not seeing the pull request link button...
pull request made: https://github.com/belaban/JGroups/pull/126
> TOA, inconsistent message delivery
> ----------------------------------
>
> Key: JGRP-1785
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1785
> Project: JGroups
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 3.5
> Environment: Fedora release 17 (Beefy Miracle)
> Reporter: Ryan Emerson
> Assignee: Pedro Ruivo
> Fix For: 3.5
>
>
> When sending total order messages between two nodes, for a prolonged period of time, an inconsistency is encountered when comparing each node's total order of messages.
> I believe this issue is related to how sequence numbers are handled in the implementation, not the protocol itself. I appreciate that TOA is designed for environments where the subset of destinations in the network varies, however I have been unable to reproduce this error when the total number of nodes is > 2. It is still possible that this inconsistency may occur after a large amount of time when the number of nodes is > 2.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
12 years, 4 months
[JBoss JIRA] (JGRP-1802) OverlappingUnicastMergeTest
by Richard Achmatowicz (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1802?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Richard Achmatowicz commented on JGRP-1802:
-------------------------------------------
Also, here you install a view by sending a VIEW_CHANGE event up the stack and down the stack, whereas in OverlappingMergeTest, you install a view my calling GMS.installView(newView).
Are these equivalent?
> OverlappingUnicastMergeTest
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: JGRP-1802
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1802
> Project: JGroups
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 3.2.13
> Environment: Solaris, RHEL
> Reporter: Richard Achmatowicz
> Assignee: Bela Ban
> Fix For: 3.2.13, 3.5
>
>
> OverlappingUnicastMergeTest does the following:
> - set up three channels a,b,c with the layers MERGE2, VERIFY_SUSPECT and FC removed
> - the receiver of each channel will look at all incoming messages: if mcast, ignore it; if unicast, add to the list of messages received
> - inject some new view into the channels which represents a view configuration which should be recovered from
> - send messages to the channels and check that the messages are received, despite the injected view
> OverlappingUnicastMergeTest this test is failing in a number of ways (i.e. many of the test methods are failing within the test class on multiple platforms.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
12 years, 4 months