Re: [undertow-dev] Resizing undertow thread pool size dynamically

From: "Mohammed ElGhaouat" <melghaouat(a)gmail.com&gt; To: "Stuart Douglas" <sdouglas(a)redhat.com&gt; Cc: "Jason Greene" <jason.greene(a)redhat.com&gt;, undertow-dev(a)lists.jboss.org Sent: Tuesday, 20 October, 2015 2:22:58 AM Subject: Re: [undertow-dev] Resizing undertow thread pool size dynamically Is this valid for Wildfly? (I am using 8.2.1)

From the previous replies, I understood that the ServletExtension could be used for embedded Undertow not for Wildfly. Anyway, I gave it a try, but still having Wildfly using task-max-threads and io-threads parameters from (subsystem=io/worker=default/). To test this solution, I created a simple wepapp with one simple Servlet and my ServletExtension.handleDeployment is executed by the Wildfly. Thanks On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Stuart Douglas <sdouglas(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > Like I said, you can use any thread pool you want if you modify it using a > ServletExtension. > > Code looks like: > > > public class MyExtension implements ServletExtension { > > @Override > public void handleDeployment(DeploymentInfo deploymentInfo, > ServletContext servletContext) { > Executor myThreadPool = {my thread pool}; > deploymentInfo.setExecutor(myThreadPool); > } > } > > Then add a META-INF/services entry for the extension. > > Stuart > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Mohammed ElGhaouat" <melghaouat(a)gmail.com&gt; > > To: "Stuart Douglas" <sdouglas(a)redhat.com&gt; > > Cc: "Jason Greene" <jason.greene(a)redhat.com&gt;, > undertow-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > > Sent: Wednesday, 14 October, 2015 12:22:20 PM > > Subject: Re: [undertow-dev] Resizing undertow thread pool size > dynamically > > > > Hello, > > > > I would like to share with you some more details about our situation. We > > are using some big machines that are shared by many software(many Wildfly > > instances, Databases, ERPs ..) If i don't set pools sizes i end up with > big > > pools as the default size is dependent on the number of CPU cores and out > > system administrator is complaining about the OS spending time checking > if > > the threads have something to do and this impact the other softwares > > installed on the same machine. If I set a small pool size which could > > sufficient in the 90% of time, i am afraid that Wildfly couldn't handle > > the 10% of time when the applications are used by a large number of user. > > > > Is there any workaround or are you planning to let the user to set a > > specific ThreadPoolExecutor ? so we can evict idle threads > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Mohammed. > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Mohammed ElGhaouat < > melghaouat(a)gmail.com&gt; > > wrote: > > > > > I am using Wildfly. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Mohammed. > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 10:55 AM, Stuart Douglas <sdouglas(a)redhat.com&gt; > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Are you using Wildfly or embedded Undertow? > > >> > > >> If it is the later you can just use > > >> io.undertow.servlet.api.DeploymentInfo#setExecutor to use whatever > > >> executor > > >> implementation you want. > > >> > > >> The reason why most executors don't reduce the number is because > there is > > >> generally very little point, a parked thread is generally very cheap, > > >> while > > >> creating new threads is relatively expensive. > > >> > > >> Stuart > > >> > > >> ----- Original Message ----- > > >> > From: "Mohammed ElGhaouat" <melghaouat(a)gmail.com&gt; > > >> > To: "Jason Greene" <jason.greene(a)redhat.com&gt; > > >> > Cc: undertow-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > > >> > Sent: Wednesday, 12 August, 2015 6:19:11 PM > > >> > Subject: Re: [undertow-dev] Resizing undertow thread pool size > > >> dynamically > > >> > > > >> > We are using the servlet API and I am referring to worker pool. > Simply > > >> we > > >> > don't want keeping bunch of idle threads in the JVM consuming some > > >> resources > > >> > without doing any thing useful. > > >> > > > >> > So with the bounded queue executor, when the value of the > > >> task-max-threads > > >> > parameter is reached, the number of threads in the worker pool > couldn't > > >> be > > >> > decreased ? > > >> > > > >> > Thank you. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Mohammed. > > >> > > > >> > On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 9:50 PM, Jason Greene < > jason.greene(a)redhat.com > > >> > > > >> > wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On Aug 11, 2015, at 4:42 AM, Mohammed ElGhaouat < > > >> melghaouat(a)gmail.com > > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Hi, > > >> > > > > >> > > I would like to know if there is a way to make undertow reducing > the > > >> size > > >> > > of the thread pool when the server is less loaded. Is there any > > >> > > parameter(or other way) that make an idle thread die after some > > >> inactivity > > >> > > time ? > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Are you referring to the worker pool or the I/O pool? The I/O pool > is > > >> special > > >> > and is fixed. The worker pool currently uses a JDK > ThreadPoolExecutor > > >> with > > >> > an unbounded queue which is a behavior pattern typically desired > for web > > >> > servers. That’s not pluggable at the moment, but it could be > possible. > > >> > > > >> > If you are using the HttpHandler APIs, there is a method on > > >> > HttpServerDispatch that allows you to use your own custom executor > for > > >> > blocking tasks (which would allow you to tune the default worker > task > > >> pool > > >> > very small). If you are using servlet APIs though that uses the > standard > > >> > pools we provide. > > >> > > > >> > Is there a particular reason you want to kill idle threads? Threads > are > > >> cheap > > >> > unless you are storing massive amounts of thread local data. > > >> > > > >> > -- > > >> > Jason T. Greene > > >> > WildFly Lead / JBoss EAP Platform Architect > > >> > JBoss, a division of Red Hat > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > _______________________________________________ > > >> > undertow-dev mailing list > > >> > undertow-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > > >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/undertow-dev > > >> > > > > > > > > >