I'm trying to send a 500m file for my tests with a heap of 400m.
In our real use cases we would probably have files under 20mo but we want
to reduce the memory consumption because we can have x parallel uploads on
the same server according to the user activity.
I'll try to check if using this BodyGenerator reduced the memory footprint
or if it's almost like before.
2013/8/28 Ryan Lubke <ryan.lubke_at_oracle.com>
> At this point in time, as far as the SSL buffer allocation is concerned,
> it's untunable.
>
> That said, feel free to open a feature request.
>
> As to your second question, there is no suggested size. This is all very
> application specific.
>
> I'm curious, how large of a file are you sending?
>
>
>
> Sébastien Lorber wrote:
>
> I have seen a lot of buffers which have a size of 33842 and it seems the
> limit is near half the capacity.
>
> Perhaps there's a way to tune that buffer size so that it consumes less
> memory?
> Is there an ideal Buffer size to send to the feed method?
>
>
> 2013/8/28 Ryan Lubke <ryan.lubke_at_oracle.com>
>
>> I'll be reviewing the PR today, thanks again!
>>
>> Regarding the OOM: as it stands now, for each new buffer that is passed
>> to the SSLFilter, we allocate a buffer twice the size in order to
>> accommodate the encrypted result. So there's an increase.
>>
>> Depending on the socket configurations of both endpoints, and how fast
>> the remote is reading data, it could
>> be the write queue is becoming too large. We do have a way to detect
>> this situation, but I'm pretty sure
>> the Grizzly internals are currently shielded here. I will see what I can
>> do to allow users to leverage this.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sébastien Lorber wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I've made my pull request.
>> https://github.com/AsyncHttpClient/async-http-client/pull/367
>>
>> With my usecase it works, the file is uploaded like before.
>>
>>
>>
>> But I didn't notice a big memory improvement.
>>
>> Is it possible that SSL doesn't allow to stream the body or something
>> like that?
>>
>>
>>
>> In memory, I have a lot of:
>> - HeapByteBuffer
>> Which are hold by SSLUtils$3
>> Which are hold by BufferBuffers
>> Which are hold by WriteResult
>> Which are hold by AsyncWriteQueueRecord
>>
>>
>> Here is an exemple of the OOM stacktrace:
>>
>> java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space
>> at java.nio.HeapByteBuffer.<init>(HeapByteBuffer.java:57)
>> at java.nio.ByteBuffer.allocate(ByteBuffer.java:331)
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLUtils.allocateOutputBuffer(SSLUtils.java:342)
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLBaseFilter$2.grow(SSLBaseFilter.java:117)
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLConnectionContext.ensureBufferSize(SSLConnectionContext.java:392)
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLConnectionContext.wrap(SSLConnectionContext.java:272)
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLConnectionContext.wrapAll(SSLConnectionContext.java:227)
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLBaseFilter.wrapAll(SSLBaseFilter.java:404)
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLBaseFilter.handleWrite(SSLBaseFilter.java:319)
>> at org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLFilter.accurateWrite(SSLFilter.java:255)
>> at org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLFilter.handleWrite(SSLFilter.java:143)
>> at
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider$SwitchingSSLFilter.handleWrite(GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.java:2503)
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.ExecutorResolver$8.execute(ExecutorResolver.java:111)
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.DefaultFilterChain.executeFilter(DefaultFilterChain.java:288)
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.DefaultFilterChain.executeChainPart(DefaultFilterChain.java:206)
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.DefaultFilterChain.execute(DefaultFilterChain.java:136)
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.DefaultFilterChain.process(DefaultFilterChain.java:114)
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ProcessorExecutor.execute(ProcessorExecutor.java:77)
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.FilterChainContext.write(FilterChainContext.java:853)
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.FilterChainContext.write(FilterChainContext.java:720)
>> at
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator.flushQueue(FeedableBodyGenerator.java:132)
>> at
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator.feed(FeedableBodyGenerator.java:101)
>> at
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.MultipartBodyGeneratorFeeder$FeedBodyGeneratorOutputStream.write(MultipartBodyGeneratorFeeder.java:222)
>> at
>> java.io.BufferedOutputStream.flushBuffer(BufferedOutputStream.java:82)
>> at java.io.BufferedOutputStream.write(BufferedOutputStream.java:126)
>> at com.ning.http.multipart.FilePart.sendData(FilePart.java:179)
>> at com.ning.http.multipart.Part.send(Part.java:331)
>> at com.ning.http.multipart.Part.sendParts(Part.java:397)
>> at
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.MultipartBodyGeneratorFeeder.feed(MultipartBodyGeneratorFeeder.java:144)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Any idea?
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/8/27 Ryan Lubke <ryan.lubke_at_oracle.com>
>>
>>> Excellent! Looking forward to the pull request!
>>>
>>>
>>> Sébastien Lorber wrote:
>>>
>>> Ryan thanks, it works fine, I'll make a pull request on AHC tomorrow
>>> with a better code using the same Part classes that already exist.
>>>
>>> I created an OutputStream that redirects to the BodyGenerator feeder.
>>>
>>> The problem I currently have is that the feeder feeds the queue faster
>>> than the async thread polling it :)
>>> I need to expose a limit to that queue size or something, will work on
>>> that, it will be better than a thread sleep to slow down the filepart
>>> reading
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/8/27 Ryan Lubke <ryan.lubke_at_oracle.com>
>>>
>>>> Yes, something like that. I was going to tackle adding something like
>>>> this today. I'll follow up with something you can test out.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sébastien Lorber wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Ok thanks!
>>>>
>>>> I think I see what I could do, probably something like that:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> FeedableBodyGenerator bodyGenerator = new FeedableBodyGenerator();
>>>> MultipartBodyGeneratorFeeder bodyGeneratorFeeder = new
>>>> MultipartBodyGeneratorFeeder(bodyGenerator);
>>>> Request uploadRequest1 = new RequestBuilder("POST")
>>>> .setUrl("url")
>>>> .setBody(bodyGenerator)
>>>> .build();
>>>>
>>>> ListenableFuture<Response> asyncRes = asyncHttpClient
>>>> .prepareRequest(uploadRequest1)
>>>> .execute(new AsyncCompletionHandlerBase());
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> bodyGeneratorFeeder.append("param1","value1");
>>>> bodyGeneratorFeeder.append("param2","value2");
>>>> bodyGeneratorFeeder.append("fileToUpload",fileInputStream);
>>>> bodyGeneratorFeeder.end();
>>>>
>>>> Response uploadResponse = asyncRes.get();
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Does it seem ok to you?
>>>>
>>>> I guess it could be interesting to provide that
>>>> MultipartBodyGeneratorFeeder class to AHC or Grizzly since some other
>>>> people may want to achieve the same thing
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2013/8/26 Ryan Lubke <ryan.lubke_at_oracle.com>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sébastien Lorber wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would like to know if it's possible to upload a file with AHC /
>>>>>> Grizzly in streaming, I mean without loading the whole file bytes in memory.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The default behavior seems to allocate a byte[] which contans the
>>>>>> whole file, so it means that my server can be OOM if too many users upload
>>>>>> a large file in the same time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've tryied with a Heap and ByteBuffer memory managers, with
>>>>>> reallocate=true/false but no more success.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems the whole file content is appended wto the
>>>>>> BufferOutputStream, and then the underlying buffer is written.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At least this seems to be the case with AHC integration:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://github.com/AsyncHttpClient/async-http-client/blob/6faf1f316e5546110b0779a5a42fd9d03ba6bc15/providers/grizzly/src/main/java/org/asynchttpclient/providers/grizzly/bodyhandler/PartsBodyHandler.java
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, is there a way to patch AHC to stream the file so that I could
>>>>>> eventually consume only 20mo of heap while uploading a 500mo file?
>>>>>> Or is this simply impossible with Grizzly?
>>>>>> I didn't notice anything related to that in the documentation.
>>>>>>
>>>>> It's possible with the FeedableBodyGenerator. But if you're tied to
>>>>> using Multipart uploads, you'd have to convert the multipart data to
>>>>> Buffers manually and send using the FeedableBodyGenerator.
>>>>> I'll take a closer look to see if this area can be improved.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Btw in my case it is a file upload. I receive a file with CXF and
>>>>>> have to transmit it to a storage server (like S3). CXF doesn't consume
>>>>>> memory bevause it is streaming the large fle uploads to the file system,
>>>>>> and then provides an input stream on that file.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>