A question first. With these changes, your memory usage is more inline
with what you were looking for?
Sébastien Lorber wrote:
> By the way, do you have any idea when the 1.7.20 will be released
> (with these new improvements?)
>
> We would like to know if we wait for a release or if we install our
> own temp release on Nexus :)
>
>
> 2013/8/30 Sébastien Lorber <lorber.sebastien_at_gmail.com
> <mailto:lorber.sebastien_at_gmail.com>>
>
> Thank you, it works fine!
>
>
> I just had to modify a single line after your commit.
>
> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider#initializeTransport
> ->
> clientTransport.getAsyncQueueIO().getWriter().setMaxPendingBytesPerConnection(10000);
>
>
> If I let the initial value (-1) it won't block, canWrite always
> returns true
>
>
> Btw, on AHC I didn't find any way to pass this value as a config
> attribute, neither the size of the write buffer you talked about.
>
> So in the end, is there a way with current AHC code to use this
> "canWrite = false" behavior?
> If not, can you please provide a way to set this behavior on
> v1.7.20 ? thanks
>
>
> PS: does it make sens to use the same number of bytes un the
> feed(Buffer) method and in the
> setMaxPendingBytesPerConnection(10000); ? do you have any tuning
> recommandation?
>
>
>
> 2013/8/29 Ryan Lubke <ryan.lubke_at_oracle.com
> <mailto:ryan.lubke_at_oracle.com>>
>
> Please disregard.
>
>
> Ryan Lubke wrote:
>> Sébastien,
>>
>> Could you also provide a sample of how you're performing your
>> feed?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -rl
>>
>> Ryan Lubke wrote:
>>> Sébastien,
>>>
>>> I'd recommend looking at Connection.canWrite() [1] and
>>> Connection.notifyCanWrite(WriteListener) [1]
>>>
>>> By default, Grizzly will configure the async write queue
>>> length to be four times the write buffer size (which is
>>> based off the socket write buffer).
>>> When this queue exceeds this value, canWrite() will return
>>> false.
>>>
>>> When this occurs, you can register a WriteListener to be
>>> notified when the queue length is below the configured max
>>> and then simulate blocking
>>> until the onWritePossible() callback has been invoked.
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> final FutureImpl<Boolean> future =
>>> Futures.createSafeFuture();
>>>
>>> // Connection may be obtained by calling
>>> FilterChainContext.getConnection().
>>> connection.notifyCanWrite(new WriteHandler() {
>>>
>>> @Override
>>> public void onWritePossible() throws Exception {
>>> future.result(Boolean.TRUE);
>>> }
>>>
>>> @Override
>>> public void onError(Throwable t) {
>>> future.failure(Exceptions.makeIOException(t));
>>> }
>>> });
>>>
>>> try {
>>> final long writeTimeout = 30;
>>> future.get(writeTimeout, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS);
>>> } catch (ExecutionException e) {
>>> HttpTransactionContext httpCtx =
>>> HttpTransactionContext.get(connection);
>>> httpCtx.abort(e.getCause());
>>> } catch (Exception e) {
>>> HttpTransactionContext httpCtx =
>>> HttpTransactionContext.get(connection);
>>> httpCtx.abort(e);
>>> }
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> http://grizzly.java.net/docs/2.3/apidocs/org/glassfish/grizzly/OutputSink.html.
>>>
>>> Sébastien Lorber wrote:
>>>> Ryan, I've did some other tests.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It seems that using a blocking queue in the
>>>> FeedableBodyGenerator is totally useless because the thread
>>>> consuming it is not blocking and the queue never blocks the
>>>> feeding, which was my intention in the beginning. Maybe it
>>>> depends on the IO strategy used?
>>>> I use AHC default which seems to use SameThreadIOStrategy
>>>> so I don't think it's related to the IO strategy.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So in the end I can upload a 70m file with a heap of 50m,
>>>> but I have to put a Thread.sleep(30) between each 100k
>>>> Buffer send to the FeedableBodyGenerator
>>>>
>>>> The connection with the server is not good here, but in
>>>> production it is normally a lot better as far as I know.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've tried things
>>>> like clientTransport.getAsyncQueueIO().getWriter().setMaxPendingBytesPerConnection(100000);
>>>> but it doesn't seem to work for me.
>>>>
>>>> I'd like the Grizzly internals to block when there are too
>>>> much pending bytes to send. Is it possible?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> PS: I've just been able to send a 500mo file with 100mo
>>>> heap, but it needed a sleep of 100ms between each 100k
>>>> Buffer sent to the bodygenerator
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2013/8/29 Sébastien Lorber <lorber.sebastien_at_gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:lorber.sebastien_at_gmail.com>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> By chance do you if I can remove the MessageCloner used
>>>> in the SSL filter?
>>>> SSLBaseFilter$OnWriteCopyCloner
>>>>
>>>> It seems to allocate a lot of memory.
>>>> I don't really understand why messages have to be
>>>> cloned, can I remove this? How?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2013/8/29 Sébastien Lorber <lorber.sebastien_at_gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:lorber.sebastien_at_gmail.com>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>> <mailto: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
>>>>> <mailto: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
>>>>>> <mailto: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
>>>>>>> <mailto: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
>>>>>>>> <mailto: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
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>