[JBoss JIRA] (JGRP-1965) Change default thread pool rejection policy to "abort"
by RH Bugzilla Integration (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1965?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
RH Bugzilla Integration commented on JGRP-1965:
-----------------------------------------------
Carlo de Wolf <cdewolf(a)redhat.com> changed the Status of [bug 1275362|https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1275362] from MODIFIED to ASSIGNED
> Change default thread pool rejection policy to "abort"
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JGRP-1965
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1965
> Project: JGroups
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 3.6.6
> Reporter: Paul Ferraro
> Assignee: Bela Ban
> Fix For: 3.6.7
>
>
> Currently, JGroups transport thread pools use discard as a rejection policy. Thus if there are no available threads, and the queue is full, the executor will silently drop the task.
> Abort will throw a RejectedExecutionException, in which case, which JGroups catches to populate the num_rejected_msgs statistic. This is a better default, so that users can monitor this value to determine whether or not to modify their thread pool configuration. Otherwise, num_rejected_msgs is 0, which might be a source of confusion.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.11#64026)
10 years, 7 months
[JBoss JIRA] (WFLY-5793) Allow selective CI builds
by Tomaz Cerar (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-5793?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Tomaz Cerar updated WFLY-5793:
------------------------------
Priority: Optional (was: Major)
> Allow selective CI builds
> -------------------------
>
> Key: WFLY-5793
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-5793
> Project: WildFly
> Issue Type: Enhancement
> Reporter: Ryan Emerson
> Assignee: Tomaz Cerar
> Priority: Optional
>
> Currently the testsuite is ran against all PRs regardless of which files are being changed. This is waste of energy/resources when commits only contain changes that do not effect code (e.g. when updating README.md).
> A possible solution would be for a blacklist to be created, which lists the file types which can be safely ignored by CI when a PR only contains changes to files of the listed file types.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.11#64026)
10 years, 7 months
[JBoss JIRA] (WFLY-5793) Allow selective CI builds
by Ryan Emerson (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-5793?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Ryan Emerson commented on WFLY-5793:
------------------------------------
I was also thinking that this could be applied to updates to *.txt, *.sh and *.bat (my understanding is there is no test cases associated with the latter two). Of course this would be applicable to the core repo as well.
I'm not familiar with the WFLY CI setup, so I don't have any real grounding on how difficult/time consuming such an enhancement would be. You could be right that the amount of resources saved is not worth the time cost.
> Allow selective CI builds
> -------------------------
>
> Key: WFLY-5793
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-5793
> Project: WildFly
> Issue Type: Enhancement
> Reporter: Ryan Emerson
> Assignee: Tomaz Cerar
>
> Currently the testsuite is ran against all PRs regardless of which files are being changed. This is waste of energy/resources when commits only contain changes that do not effect code (e.g. when updating README.md).
> A possible solution would be for a blacklist to be created, which lists the file types which can be safely ignored by CI when a PR only contains changes to files of the listed file types.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.11#64026)
10 years, 7 months
[JBoss JIRA] (WFBUILD-14) Conflicting feature pack dependency versions should not be allowed
by Thomas Diesler (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFBUILD-14?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin... ]
Thomas Diesler updated WFBUILD-14:
----------------------------------
Description:
There was a brief discussion about this on the WildFly dev mailing list so I'm capturing the problem here as well.
Consider the following.
Feature pack 'A' has a dependency on the WildFly 9 feature pack. E.g:
{code:xml}
<dependencies>
<artifact name="org.wildfly:wildfly-feature-pack:9.0.1.Final" />
</dependencies>
{code}
Feature pack 'B' has a dependency on the WildFly 10 feature pack and also on feature pack 'A'. E.g:
{code:xml}
<dependencies>
<artifact name="org.wildfly:wildfly-feature-pack:10.0.0.CR3" />
<artifact name="org.foo:feature-pack-A" />
</dependencies>
{code}
The result is that you'll have overlapping and possibly problematic non-overlapping file paths coming from the conflicting WildFly versions
At the moment the plugins allow this scenario, which can lead to all sorts of horrors when using the server-provisioning plugin to provision an app server.
CrossRef: https://github.com/wildfly-extras/fuse-patch/issues/101
was:
There was a brief discussion about this on the WildFly dev mailing list so I'm capturing the problem here as well.
Consider the following.
Feature pack 'A' has a dependency on the WildFly 9 feature pack. E.g:
<dependencies>
<artifact name="org.wildfly:wildfly-feature-pack:9.0.1.Final" />
</dependencies>
Feature pack 'B' has a dependency on the WildFly 10 feature pack and also on feature pack 'A'. E.g:
<dependencies>
<artifact name="org.wildfly:wildfly-feature-pack:10.0.0.CR3" />
<artifact name="org.foo:feature-pack-A" />
</dependencies>
The result is that you'll have overlapping and possibly problematic non-overlapping file paths coming from the conflicting WildFly versions
At the moment the plugins allow this scenario, which can lead to all sorts of horrors when using the server-provisioning plugin to provision an app server.
> Conflicting feature pack dependency versions should not be allowed
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WFBUILD-14
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFBUILD-14
> Project: WildFly Build Tools
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: James Netherton
> Assignee: Stuart Douglas
>
> There was a brief discussion about this on the WildFly dev mailing list so I'm capturing the problem here as well.
> Consider the following.
> Feature pack 'A' has a dependency on the WildFly 9 feature pack. E.g:
> {code:xml}
> <dependencies>
> <artifact name="org.wildfly:wildfly-feature-pack:9.0.1.Final" />
> </dependencies>
> {code}
> Feature pack 'B' has a dependency on the WildFly 10 feature pack and also on feature pack 'A'. E.g:
> {code:xml}
> <dependencies>
> <artifact name="org.wildfly:wildfly-feature-pack:10.0.0.CR3" />
> <artifact name="org.foo:feature-pack-A" />
> </dependencies>
> {code}
> The result is that you'll have overlapping and possibly problematic non-overlapping file paths coming from the conflicting WildFly versions
> At the moment the plugins allow this scenario, which can lead to all sorts of horrors when using the server-provisioning plugin to provision an app server.
> CrossRef: https://github.com/wildfly-extras/fuse-patch/issues/101
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.11#64026)
10 years, 7 months
[JBoss JIRA] (WFLY-5796) Topic Subsriber does only get messages produced on node 2 after failover and failback of node 1
by Michal Sudra (JIRA)
Michal Sudra created WFLY-5796:
----------------------------------
Summary: Topic Subsriber does only get messages produced on node 2 after failover and failback of node 1
Key: WFLY-5796
URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-5796
Project: WildFly
Issue Type: Bug
Components: JMS
Affects Versions: 10.0.0.CR4
Environment: 2 node symmetrical colocated life backup cluster (domain mode). Configuration (domain.xml, host.xml) provided as attachment.
Reporter: Michal Sudra
Assignee: Jeff Mesnil
Attachments: domain.xml, host.xml
Client (Topic Subscriber) is connected to a 2 node symmetrical colocated life backup cluster receiving messages produced on any node (random).
Observed behavior:
When node 1 is shut down (failover to node 2). -> Client is automatically failing over to node 2 and is continuing to consume messages produced on node 2.
Then node 1 is restarted (failback to node 1). From now on the client is only receiving messages produced on node 2, not messages produced on node 1.
When node 2 is shut down (failover to node 1). -> Client is automatically failing over to node 1 and is continuing to consume messages produced on node 1.
Then node 2 is restarted (failback to node 2). From now on the client is only receiving messages produced on node 1, not messages produced on node 2.
Expected behavior:
The client should at any time receive all messages regardless on which node the message is produced.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.11#64026)
10 years, 7 months