users@grizzly.java.net

Re: Upload a large file without oom with Grizzly

From: Sébastien Lorber <lorber.sebastien_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 15:00:13 +0200

Unfortunatly I won't be able to use the Feeder non-blocking stuff for now,
because of how the multipart request in handled in AHC


Here's my feeding method:

  public void feed() throws IOException {
    Part[] partsArray = parts.toArray(new Part[parts.size()]);
    try ( OutputStream outputStream = createFeedingOutputStream() ) {
      Part.sendParts(outputStream,partsArray,multipartBoundary);
    } catch (Exception e) {
      throw new IllegalStateException("Unable to feed the
FeedableBodyGenerator",e);
    }
  }


As you can see, the multipart Parts array can only be pushed to the
OutputStream, I don't have any way to "pull" the data when the canFeed()
method is triggered.


But I've seen that there's a com.ning.http.multipart.MultipartBody#read
that seems to provide a memory efficient way to pull data from a Multipart
body...

Should see what I come up with this


2013/9/10 Sébastien Lorber <lorber.sebastien_at_gmail.com>

> It seems the Feeder is highly recommended but not mandatory so I tried
> without.
>
> With my existing code it seems there is a synchronization problem.
>
>
> The feeding threads get locked to the prematureFeed.get();
>
> So the Grizzly kernel threads are unable to acquire the lock required to
> enter the initializeAsynchronousTransfer method
>
>
>
> Will try with an implementation of Feeder
>
>
>
> 2013/9/10 Sébastien Lorber <lorber.sebastien_at_gmail.com>
>
>> Hmmm it seems I have a problem with one of your maven plugins. I'll try
>> to bypass it, but for info:
>>
>> ➜ ahc2 git:(ahc-1.7.x) mvn clean install
>> [WARNING]
>> [WARNING] Some problems were encountered while building the effective
>> settings
>> [WARNING] 'profiles.profile[default].repositories.repository.id' must be
>> unique but found duplicate repository with id fullsix-maven-repository @
>> /home/slorber/.m2/settings.xml
>> [WARNING]
>> [INFO] Scanning for projects...
>> [INFO]
>>
>> [INFO]
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> [INFO] Building Asynchronous Http Client 1.7.20-SNAPSHOT
>> [INFO]
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> [INFO]
>> [INFO] --- maven-clean-plugin:2.4.1:clean (default-clean) @
>> async-http-client ---
>> [INFO]
>> [INFO] --- maven-enforcer-plugin:1.0-beta-1:enforce (enforce-maven) @
>> async-http-client ---
>> [INFO]
>> [INFO] --- maven-enforcer-plugin:1.0-beta-1:enforce (enforce-versions) @
>> async-http-client ---
>> [INFO]
>> [INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.4.3:resources (default-resources) @
>> async-http-client ---
>> [INFO] Using 'UTF-8' encoding to copy filtered resources.
>> [INFO] skip non existing resourceDirectory
>> /home/slorber/Bureau/ahc2/src/main/resources
>> [INFO]
>> [INFO] --- maven-compiler-plugin:2.3.2:compile (default-compile) @
>> async-http-client ---
>> [INFO] Compiling 158 source files to
>> /home/slorber/Bureau/ahc2/target/classes
>> [INFO]
>> *[INFO] --- animal-sniffer-maven-plugin:1.6:check
>> (check-java-1.5-compat) @ async-http-client ---*
>> *[INFO] Checking unresolved references to
>> org.codehaus.mojo.signature:java15:1.0*
>> *[ERROR] Undefined reference:
>> java/io/IOException.<init>(Ljava/lang/Throwable;)V in
>> /home/slorber/Bureau/ahc2/target/classes/com/ning/http/client/providers/grizzly/FeedableBodyGenerator.class
>> *
>> [INFO]
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> [INFO] BUILD FAILURE
>> [INFO]
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> [INFO] Total time: 8.747s
>> [INFO] Finished at: Tue Sep 10 11:25:41 CEST 2013
>> [INFO] Final Memory: 30M/453M
>> [INFO]
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *[ERROR] Failed to execute goal
>> org.codehaus.mojo:animal-sniffer-maven-plugin:1.6:check
>> (check-java-1.5-compat) on project async-http-client: Signature errors
>> found. Verify them and put @IgnoreJRERequirement on them. -> [Help 1]*
>> [ERROR]
>> [ERROR] To see the full stack trace of the errors, re-run Maven with the
>> -e switch.
>> [ERROR] Re-run Maven using the -X switch to enable full debug logging.
>> [ERROR]
>> [ERROR] For more information about the errors and possible solutions,
>> please read the following articles:
>> [ERROR] [Help 1]
>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/MojoFailureException
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/9/10 Sébastien Lorber <lorber.sebastien_at_gmail.com>
>>
>>> Ok thank you, I'll try to implement that today and will give you my
>>> feedback :)
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/9/10 Ryan Lubke <ryan.lubke_at_oracle.com>
>>>
>>>> Okay,
>>>>
>>>> I've committed my initial changes to the AHC repository. Here's a
>>>> summary of the changes:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Improvements to the FeedableBodyGenerator (Grizzly's).
>>>> - Don't allow queueing of data before initiateAsyncTransfer has been
>>>> invoked. In low memory
>>>> heaps, this could lead to an OOM if the source is feeding too fast. The
>>>> new behavior is to
>>>> block until initiateAsyncTransfer is called, at which time the blocked
>>>> thread may proceed with
>>>> the feed operation.
>>>> - Introduce the concept of a Feeder. Implementations are responsible,
>>>> at a high level, for:
>>>> + letting the provider know that data is available to be fed without
>>>> blocking
>>>> + allowing the registration of a callback that the Feeder
>>>> implementation may invoke
>>>> to signal that more data is available, if it wasn't available at a
>>>> previous point in time.
>>>> - When using a Feeder with a secure request, the SSL handshake will be
>>>> kicked off by the
>>>> initiateAsyncTransfer call, but feeding of data will not occur until
>>>> the handshake is complete.
>>>> This is necessary as the SSLFilter will queue up all writes until the
>>>> handshake is complete,
>>>> and currently, the buffer isn't tied in with the transport flow control
>>>> mechanism.
>>>> NOTE: This new SSL behavior is not currently applied when invoking the
>>>> feed() method
>>>> outside the context of a Feeder. Still need to address that.
>>>> - Exposed configuration of the async write queue limit through the
>>>> FeedableBodyGenerator.
>>>> This is an improvement on using a TransportCustomizer as any
>>>> configuration there is
>>>> transport-wide, and therefor applied to all Connections. By exposing it
>>>> here, each feeder
>>>> may have a different byte limit.
>>>> - Improved documentation for this class*
>>>>
>>>> I recommend reading through the javadoc comments in the source [1] for
>>>> FeedableBodyGenerator (comments welcome).
>>>> Additionally, I would re-work your code to leverage the Feeder instead
>>>> of calling feed() directly.
>>>>
>>>> If you have issues implementing Feeder, do let us know.
>>>>
>>>> If you have additional questions, again, let us know.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> -rl
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>> https://github.com/AsyncHttpClient/async-http-client/blob/ahc-1.7.x/src/main/java/com/ning/http/client/providers/grizzly/FeedableBodyGenerator.java
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ryan Lubke wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sébastien Lorber wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So in the end I've end up with an implementation that's working for me.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think there are 2 bugs:
>>>>
>>>> 1) The bytes can accumulate in the FeedableBodyGenerator queue if the
>>>> initialize(ctx) method is not called fast enough.
>>>> This can be solved by using a BlockingQueue of size 1 and the put()
>>>> method.
>>>>
>>>> 2) Once the context is injected, the FeedableBodyGenerator flushes the
>>>> queue.
>>>> The matter is that if the connection is new, not warmed up by a
>>>> previous request, then the SSL handshake is not done yet, and it seems that
>>>> the bytes are accumulated in some part of the SSL filter which doesn't
>>>> deliver them to the connection until the handshake has completed,
>>>> so c.canWrite() continues to return true.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have replaced some part of the FeedableBodyGenerator to test this and
>>>> it works pretty fine. See what I have changed:
>>>>
>>>> 1)
>>>> private final BlockingQueue<BodyPart> queue = new
>>>> LinkedBlockingQueue<BodyPart>(1);
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2)
>>>> public void feed(final Buffer buffer, final boolean last) throws
>>>> IOException {
>>>> try {
>>>> queue.put(new BodyPart(buffer, last));
>>>> } catch (InterruptedException e) {
>>>> throw new RuntimeException(e);
>>>> }
>>>> queueSize.incrementAndGet();
>>>>
>>>> if (context != null) {
>>>> blockUntilConnectionIsReadyToWrite(context);
>>>> flushQueue(true);
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> private void blockUntilConnectionIsReadyToWrite(FilterChainContext
>>>> fcc) {
>>>> if ( !connectionIsReadyToWrite(fcc) ) {
>>>> while ( !connectionIsReadyToWrite(fcc) ) {
>>>> try { Thread.sleep(10); } catch ( Exception e ) { throw new
>>>> RuntimeException(e); }
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> private boolean connectionIsReadyToWrite(FilterChainContext fcc) {
>>>> Connection connection = fcc.getConnection();
>>>> SSLEngine sslEngine = SSLUtils.getSSLEngine(connection);
>>>> return sslEngine != null && !SSLUtils.isHandshaking(sslEngine);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What do you think?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We had come to similar conclusions on this end. I'm still working
>>>> through testing the idea I mentioned previously (took longer than I
>>>> expected - sorry).
>>>> I hope to have something for you to test very soon.
>>>>
>>>> Note that it will be taking the above into account as well.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2013/9/5 Sébastien Lorber <lorber.sebastien_at_gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have tried to put a while ( context == null ) Thread.sleep but it
>>>>> doesn't seem to work, when the context gets injected, after the sleeps,
>>>>> there's an OOM
>>>>>
>>>>> So I hope you'll have more success with your alternative :)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have done another test, remember my code that worked, which
>>>>> previously "warmed" the Thread with an useless request.
>>>>>
>>>>> private Runnable uploadSingleDocumentRunnable = new Runnable() {
>>>>> @Override
>>>>> public void run() {
>>>>> try {
>>>>> getUselessSessionCode();
>>>>> Thread.sleep(X);
>>>>> uploadSingleDocument();
>>>>> } catch ( Exception e ) {
>>>>> throw new RuntimeException("file upload failed",e);
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>> I have put a sleep of X between the useless warmup request, and the
>>>>> real upload request
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What I noticed is that there is a very different behavior according to
>>>>> the value of X
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Under 10 seconds, it seems the stuff is still warm, I can upload the
>>>>> documents.
>>>>> Around 10 seconds I get a stack which seems to be "connection closed"
>>>>> or something
>>>>> Above 10 seconds, I get OOM like if the stuff wasn't warm.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The stacks I get for 10 seconds looks like
>>>>>
>>>>> Caused by: javax.net.ssl.SSLException: SSLEngine is CLOSED
>>>>> at
>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLConnectionContext.wrap(SSLConnectionContext.java:295)
>>>>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>>>>> at
>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLConnectionContext.wrapAll(SSLConnectionContext.java:238)
>>>>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>>>>> at
>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLBaseFilter.wrapAll(SSLBaseFilter.java:405)
>>>>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>>>>> at
>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLBaseFilter.handleWrite(SSLBaseFilter.java:320)
>>>>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>>>>> at
>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLFilter.accurateWrite(SSLFilter.java:255)
>>>>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>>>>> at org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLFilter.handleWrite(SSLFilter.java:143)
>>>>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>>>>> at
>>>>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider$SwitchingSSLFilter.handleWrite(GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.java:2500)
>>>>> ~[async-http-client-1.7.20-SNAPSHOT.jar:na]
>>>>> at
>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.ExecutorResolver$8.execute(ExecutorResolver.java:111)
>>>>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>>>>> at
>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.DefaultFilterChain.executeFilter(DefaultFilterChain.java:288)
>>>>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>>>>> at
>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.DefaultFilterChain.executeChainPart(DefaultFilterChain.java:206)
>>>>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>>>>> at
>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.DefaultFilterChain.execute(DefaultFilterChain.java:136)
>>>>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>>>>> at
>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.DefaultFilterChain.process(DefaultFilterChain.java:114)
>>>>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>>>>> at
>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ProcessorExecutor.execute(ProcessorExecutor.java:77)
>>>>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>>>>> at
>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.FilterChainContext.write(FilterChainContext.java:853)
>>>>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>>>>> at
>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.FilterChainContext.write(FilterChainContext.java:720)
>>>>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>>>>> at
>>>>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator.flushQueue(FeedableBodyGenerator.java:133)
>>>>> ~[async-http-client-1.7.20-SNAPSHOT.jar:na]
>>>>> at
>>>>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator.feed(FeedableBodyGenerator.java:95)
>>>>> ~[async-http-client-1.7.20-SNAPSHOT.jar:na]
>>>>>
>>>>> I think I got some other different stacks saying Connection Closed
>>>>> Remotely or something like that.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So it seems that something is bound to my thread, and it stays bound
>>>>> to it for about 10 seconds, do you have any idea what it could be?
>>>>> (My connection timeout setting seems to have no effect on this 10s
>>>>> threshold)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 2013/9/5 Ryan Lubke <ryan.lubke_at_oracle.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>> That is one solution. I'm working out an alternative right now.
>>>>>> Stay tuned!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyway it's not a problem, I think the FeedableBodyGenerator.feed()
>>>>>> method just has to block until a context has been (and ThreadCache
>>>>>> initialized) to avoid OOM errors
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2013/9/5 Sébastien Lorber <lorber.sebastien_at_gmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What is very strange is that I tested with/without the same
>>>>>>> sessionCode with our previous code, the one not using
>>>>>>> FeedableBodyGenerator, which has a high memory consumption.
>>>>>>> Despites the fact it had high memory consumption, it seems work fine
>>>>>>> to upload multiple documents if allocated with a large heap, and the
>>>>>>> sessionCode seems to have no effect.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On the new impl using the FeedableBodyGenerator, the sessionCode
>>>>>>> sent as a multipart bodypart seems to have an effect.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have tried to feed the queue before sending the request to AHC,
>>>>>>> but this leads to this exception (with/without sessionCode switching)
>>>>>>> Caused by: java.util.concurrent.TimeoutException: Timeout exceeded
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.timeout(GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.java:528)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider$3.onTimeout(GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.java:361)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.utils.IdleTimeoutFilter$DefaultWorker.doWork(IdleTimeoutFilter.java:383)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.utils.IdleTimeoutFilter$DefaultWorker.doWork(IdleTimeoutFilter.java:362)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.utils.DelayedExecutor$DelayedRunnable.run(DelayedExecutor.java:158)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1110)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:603)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2013/9/5 Sébastien Lorber <lorber.sebastien_at_gmail.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> By the way, by using a low timeout with the same sessioncode, I got
>>>>>>>> the following NPE:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.NullPointerException
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator.block(FeedableBodyGenerator.java:184)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator.blockUntilQueueFree(FeedableBodyGenerator.java:167)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator.flushQueue(FeedableBodyGenerator.java:124)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator.feed(FeedableBodyGenerator.java:94)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.HttpTransactionContext httpCtx
>>>>>>>> =
>>>>>>>> getHttpTransactionContext(c);
>>>>>>>> httpCtx.abort(e.getCause());
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I guess the httpCtx is not already available to be aborted
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2013/9/5 Sébastien Lorber <lorber.sebastien_at_gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is right, here's a log I have when I use the same session
>>>>>>>>> code, ie the remote host is blocking the data or something.
>>>>>>>>> This is obtained by running 5 parallel uploads.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Flushing queue of size 0 with allowBlocking = false*
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> *Flushing queue of size 97 with allowBlocking = false*
>>>>>>>>> *Flushing queue of size 100 with allowBlocking = false*
>>>>>>>>> *Flushing queue of size 160 with allowBlocking = true*
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 0 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: GC overhead limit exceeded
>>>>>>>>> Dumping heap to /ome/lorber/ureau/om ...
>>>>>>>>> Unable to create /ome/lorber/ureau/om: Le fichier existe
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Disconnected from the target VM, address: '127.0.0.1:49268',
>>>>>>>>> transport: 'socket'
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Otherwise, with different session codes, I get the following:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Flushing queue of size 0 with allowBlocking = false*
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> *Flushing queue of size 0 with allowBlocking = false*
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> *Flushing queue of size 0 with allowBlocking = false*
>>>>>>>>> *Flushing queue of size 0 with allowBlocking = false*
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> Flushing queue of size 1 with allowBlocking = true
>>>>>>>>> ... and this continues without OOM
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, this seems to be the problem.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think it would be great to be able to be able to choose the
>>>>>>>>> queue impl behind that FeedableBodyGenerator, like I suggested in my pull
>>>>>>>>> request.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> See here:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/slorber/async-http-client/blob/79b0c3b28a61b0aa4c4b055bca8f6be11d9ed1e6/src/main/java/com/ning/http/client/providers/grizzly/FeedableBodyGenerator.java
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Using a LinkedBlockingQueue seems to be a nice idea in this
>>>>>>>>> context, and in my case I would probably use a queue of size 1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This would handle the blocking of the feed method, without having
>>>>>>>>> to use this:
>>>>>>>>> if (context != null) {
>>>>>>>>> flushQueue(true);
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Or perhaps the feed() method have to wait until a context is set
>>>>>>>>> in the BodyGenerator ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think it would be more clear if
>>>>>>>>> the initializeAsynchronousTransfer simply didn't flush the queue but just
>>>>>>>>> setup the context.
>>>>>>>>> Then the feed method would block until there's a context set, and
>>>>>>>>> then flush the queue with blocking behavior.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is probably the next step, but as we are using AHC for async,
>>>>>>>>> it would probably be great if that blocking feed() method was called in a
>>>>>>>>> worker thread instead of our main thread.
>>>>>>>>> I won't use this but someone who really wants a non-blocking impl
>>>>>>>>> of performant multipart fileupload would probably need this, or will use an
>>>>>>>>> ExecutorService for the feeding operations as a workaround.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks again for your reactivity
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2013/9/4 Ryan Lubke <ryan.lubke_at_oracle.com>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sébastien Lorber wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I've integrated this change and it works fine except a little
>>>>>>>>>> detail.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm uploading files to a third party API (a bit like S3).
>>>>>>>>>> This API requires a "sessionCode" in each request. So there is a
>>>>>>>>>> multipart StringPart with that SessionCode.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> We used to have a cache which holds the sessionCode 30min per
>>>>>>>>>> user so that we do not need to init a new session each time.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I had troubles in this very specific case: when I upload 5 docs
>>>>>>>>>> with the same session code.
>>>>>>>>>> When I remove the cache and use 5 different session codes, it
>>>>>>>>>> works fine.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I guess the remote service is blocking concurrent uploads with
>>>>>>>>>> the same session code. I don't know at all.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Where I want to go is that I wouldn't have expected Grizzly to OOM
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Avertissement: Exception during FilterChain execution
>>>>>>>>>> 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$2.grow(SSLBaseFilter.java:117)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLConnectionContext.ensureBufferSize(SSLConnectionContext.java:392)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLConnectionContext.wrap(SSLConnectionContext.java:272)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLConnectionContext.wrapAll(SSLConnectionContext.java:238)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLBaseFilter.wrapAll(SSLBaseFilter.java:405)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLBaseFilter.handleWrite(SSLBaseFilter.java:320)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLFilter.accurateWrite(SSLFilter.java:263)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLFilter.handleWrite(SSLFilter.java:143)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider$SwitchingSSLFilter.handleWrite(GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.java:2500)
>>>>>>>>>> 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$1.run(FilterChainContext.java:196)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.FilterChainContext.resume(FilterChainContext.java:220)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLFilter$SSLHandshakeContext.completed(SSLFilter.java:383)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLFilter.notifyHandshakeComplete(SSLFilter.java:278)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLBaseFilter.handleRead(SSLBaseFilter.java:275)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider$SwitchingSSLFilter.handleRead(GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.java:2490)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.ExecutorResolver$9.execute(ExecutorResolver.java:119)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.DefaultFilterChain.executeFilter(DefaultFilterChain.java:288)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.DefaultFilterChain.executeChainPart(DefaultFilterChain.java:206)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.DefaultFilterChain.execute(DefaultFilterChain.java:136)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.DefaultFilterChain.process(DefaultFilterChain.java:114)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ProcessorExecutor.execute(ProcessorExecutor.java:77)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.nio.transport.TCPNIOTransport.fireIOEvent(TCPNIOTransport.java:546)
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.strategies.AbstractIOStrategy.fireIOEvent(AbstractIOStrategy.java:113)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Caused by: java.util.concurrent.TimeoutException: null
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.impl.SafeFutureImpl$Sync.innerGet(SafeFutureImpl.java:367)
>>>>>>>>>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> org.glassfish.grizzly.impl.SafeFutureImpl.get(SafeFutureImpl.java:274)
>>>>>>>>>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator.block(FeedableBodyGenerator.java:177)
>>>>>>>>>> ~[async-http-client-1.7.20-204092c.jar:na]
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator.blockUntilQueueFree(FeedableBodyGenerator.java:167)
>>>>>>>>>> ~[async-http-client-1.7.20-204092c.jar:na]
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator.flushQueue(FeedableBodyGenerator.java:124)
>>>>>>>>>> ~[async-http-client-1.7.20-204092c.jar:na]
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator.feed(FeedableBodyGenerator.java:94)
>>>>>>>>>> ~[async-http-client-1.7.20-204092c.jar:na]
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> multipart.body.generator.feeder.buffer=100000 -> size of each
>>>>>>>>>> Buffer sent to the FeedableBodyGenerator
>>>>>>>>>> transport.max.pending.bytes=1000000
>>>>>>>>>> (I tried other settings, including AUTO_SIZE)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Do you have any idea why is there an OOM with these settings?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps it is because the feed() method of FeedableBodyGenerator
>>>>>>>>>> doesn't block until the context is initialized.
>>>>>>>>>> I guess the initializeAsynchronousTransfer is called only once
>>>>>>>>>> the connection is established, and perhaps a lot of Buffer are added to the
>>>>>>>>>> queue...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes, it's invoked once the request has been dispatched, so if the
>>>>>>>>>> generator is fed a lot before the request, I could see this happening.
>>>>>>>>>> I'll see what I can do to alleviate that case.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But I'm not sure at all because the session code is transmitted
>>>>>>>>>> as a BodyPart and I get the same problem if i put it as the first or last
>>>>>>>>>> multipart.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's not a big deal, perhaps I should always use a different
>>>>>>>>>> session code for concurrent operations but I'd like to be sure that we
>>>>>>>>>> won't have this issue in production...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2013/9/3 Ryan Lubke <ryan.lubke_at_oracle.com>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Good catch. Fixed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sébastien Lorber wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There's a little mistake in the grizzly ahc provider relative to
>>>>>>>>>>> the write queue size.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/AsyncHttpClient/async-http-client/blob/b5d97efe9fe14113ea92fb1f7db192a2d090fad7/src/main/java/com/ning/http/client/providers/grizzly/GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.java#L419
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> As you can see, the TransportCustomizer is called, and then the
>>>>>>>>>>> write queue size (among other things) is set to AUTO_SIZE (instead of
>>>>>>>>>>> previously UNLIMITED)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> clientTransport.getAsyncQueueIO().getWriter()
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> .setMaxPendingBytesPerConnection(AsyncQueueWriter.AUTO_SIZE);
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think the default settings like this AUTO_SIZE attribute
>>>>>>>>>>> should be set before the customization of the transport, or they would
>>>>>>>>>>> override the value we customized.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This is actually my case, since I can't reproduce my "bug" which
>>>>>>>>>>> is "high memory consumption", even when using -1 / UNLIMITED in the
>>>>>>>>>>> TransportCustomizer.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This could work fine for me with AUTO_SIZE, but I'd rather be
>>>>>>>>>>> able to tune this parameter during load tests to see the effect.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 2013/8/31 Sebastien Lorber <lorber.sebastien_at_gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks i will ckeck that on monday. I can now upload a 500m
>>>>>>>>>>>> file with 40m heap size ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Envoyé de mon iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 30 août 2013 à 20:49, Ryan Lubke <ryan.lubke_at_oracle.com> a
>>>>>>>>>>>> écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm going to be updating the Grizzly provider such that
>>>>>>>>>>>> AUTO_SIZE (not AUTO_TUNE) is the default, so you can avoid the use of the
>>>>>>>>>>>> TransportCustomizer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ryan Lubke wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Regarding your tuning question, I would probably set the value
>>>>>>>>>>>> to AsyncQueueWriter.AUTO_TUNE (this will be four times the socket write
>>>>>>>>>>>> buffer) and see how that works.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ryan Lubke wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 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>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
© Oracle | By contributing to this project, you are agreeing to the terms of use described here.