Thanks,
So in the end it seems I can run concurrent uploads. But it is kind of
limited, with 10 threads it works fine, and with 20 threads it seems the
flush call is sometimes done too early because the feed method is not
blocking, which produces OOM in some cases. The threshold seems to be
around 15.
I found a solution which seems to work in every situation:
- Use a worker thread pool > number of concurrent requests
- Wait a bit before starting the feeding.
My waiting code is:
private volatile boolean alreadyFlushed = false;
@Override
public synchronized void flush() {
if ( alreadyFlushed ) {
return;
}
try { Thread.sleep(1000); } catch ( Exception e ) {
e.printStackTrace(); }
startFeeding();
alreadyFlushed = true;
}
With a 35 worker thread pool and this waiting code, I can run* *30 concurrent
uploads of large files, without having performed any request before.
If I remove any of these 2 tricks, I get problems.
*1) If I put a low worker thread number:*
I mean, for 30 concurrent uploads, it starts to fail even for something
like 31/32 worker threads
Sometime I get timeout stacks:
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)
Sometime I get OOM stacks:
Caused by: 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$2.grow(SSLBaseFilter.java:117)
at
org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLConnectionContext.ensureBufferSize(SSLConnectionContext.java:392)
at
org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLConnectionContext.wrap(SSLConnectionContext.java:272)
at
org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLConnectionContext.wrapAll(SSLConnectionContext.java:227)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLBaseFilter.wrapAll(SSLBaseFilter.java:405)
at
org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLBaseFilter.handleWrite(SSLBaseFilter.java:320)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLFilter.accurateWrite(SSLFilter.java:263)
at org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLFilter.handleWrite(SSLFilter.java:143)
at
com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider$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)
Another very strange behavior I have is that some FileInputStream that are
used for the requests are read prematurely for a reason I can't understand.
Not all, but some of the 30 concurrent uploads. I can see just after the
firing of the 30 upload requests in my log:
[Grizzly(1)] INFO com....DocumentService$1:276 - Will close file stream
java.io.FileInputStream_at_61187ada after having read 10632755 bytes
[Grizzly(15)] INFO com....DocumentService$1:276 - Will close file stream
java.io.FileInputStream_at_1ba83dc after having read 10632755 bytes
[Grizzly(13)] INFO com....DocumentService$1:276 - Will close file stream
java.io.FileInputStream_at_7c26e166 after having read 10632755 bytes
[Grizzly(10)] INFO com....DocumentService$1:276 - Will close file stream
java.io.FileInputStream_at_5c982f37 after having read 10632755 bytes
[Grizzly(6)] INFO com....DocumentService$1:276 - Will close file stream
java.io.FileInputStream_at_b43f35f after having read 10632755 bytes
[Grizzly(4)] INFO com....DocumentService$1:276 - Will close file stream
java.io.FileInputStream_at_1a1ee7c0 after having read 10632755 bytes
[Grizzly(9)] INFO com....DocumentService$1:276 - Will close file stream
java.io.FileInputStream_at_6300fba5 after having read 10632755 bytes
[Grizzly(16)] INFO com....DocumentService$1:276 - Will close file stream
java.io.FileInputStream_at_49d88b78 after having read 10632755 bytes
[Grizzly(4)] INFO com....DocumentService$1:276 - Will close file stream
java.io.FileInputStream_at_3b7b65f8 after having read 598016 bytes
--asept. 12, 2013 5:54:14 PM
org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.DefaultFilterChain execute
Avertissement: Exception during FilterChain execution
java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: GC overhead limit exceeded
This close operation on the file stream is supposed to happen after more
than 30 seconds because the connection is slow and the file is 10M
This generally leads to OOM errors, it seems the whole file is mounted in
memory for unknown reason in some cases, but only when there are not enough
worker threads.
It's not a big deal, I guess it is "normal" to use at least 30 threads to
run 30 concurrent uploads :) It's just that when this happens it's not easy
to understand why we have OOMs and how it relates to the AHC grizzly thread
pool.
*2) If I remove that sleep(1000) before feeding or use a lower number*
This leads to the same kind of behavior, with the InputStream being read
prematurely.
So I guess, the problem is that when the flush() method is called it seems
the connection always return canWrite=true, so the blocking never happen
until something happen and the connection starts to block the feeding
I tried to debug that and here's the connection queue state:
- connectionQueue = {org.glassfish.grizzly.asyncqueue.TaskQueue_at_4804}
- isClosed = true
- queue = {java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentLinkedQueue_at_5106} size = 0
- currentElement = {java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicReference_at_5107
}"null"
- spaceInBytes = {java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicInteger_at_5108}"291331"
- maxQueueSizeHolder = {org.glassfish.grizzly.nio.NIOConnection$1_at_5109}
- writeHandlersCounter = {java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicInteger_at_5110
}"0"
- writeHandlersQueue = {java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentLinkedQueue_at_5111}
size = 0
Do you have any idea what could be the problem?
This happens when flush() is called from both init() and
handshakeComplete() methods
2013/9/12 Ryan Lubke <ryan.lubke_at_oracle.com>
>
>
> Sébastien Lorber wrote:
>
>
>
>
> I noticed something strange.
> On the FileInputStream I have, I've added a log on the close() of the
> stream which is called once the whole file has been read to be sent to the
> feeder.
>
> 1) If I perform a request (ie my session init request in the previous
> discussions) before doing my multipart upload, the thread that does execute
> the feeding is the thread that fires the request, and not a Grizzly worker.
> [Thread-30] INFO Will close file stream java.io.FileInputStream_at_27fe4315after having read 1440304 bytes
>
>
> 2) If I don't do any request before firing the multipart upload, the
> thread that does the feeding is a Grizzly threadpool worker thread:
> [Grizzly(22)] INFO Will close file stream java.io.FileInputStream_at_59ac4002after having read 1440304 bytes
>
>
> Is this normal? I would expect a worker thread to always be used, and the
> main applicative thread that performs the request to never be blocking.
> (but it's not such an issue for me, we don't have a reactive non-blocking
> app anyway)
>
> It's currently expected behavior. Will need to re-evaluate this based on
> the new semantics of the FeedableBodyGenerator.
>
>
>
> On the 1st case, here's the stacktrace when the feed method is called:
>
> * at
> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator.initializeAsynchronousTransfer(FeedableBodyGenerator.java:178)
> *
> at
> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider$BodyGeneratorBodyHandler.doHandle(GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.java:2210)
> at
> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.sendRequest(GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.java:564)
> at
> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider$AsyncHttpClientFilter.sendAsGrizzlyRequest(GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.java:913)
> at
> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider$AsyncHttpClientFilter.handleWrite(GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.java:795)
> 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.DefaultFilterChain.write(DefaultFilterChain.java:437)
> at org.glassfish.grizzly.nio.NIOConnection.write(NIOConnection.java:387)
> at org.glassfish.grizzly.nio.NIOConnection.write(NIOConnection.java:361)
> at
> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.execute(GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.java:307)
> at
> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider$1.completed(GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.java:224)
> at
> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider$1.completed(GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.java:210)
> at
> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider$ConnectionManager.doAsyncTrackedConnection(GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.java:2289)
> at
> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.execute(GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.java:244)
> * at
> com.ning.http.client.AsyncHttpClient.executeRequest(AsyncHttpClient.java:534)
> *
>
> So it seems this happen when the handshake has already been done when *
> initializeAsynchronousTransfer* is called, so that we do not go through
> the HandshakeListener
>
>
> Notice that this case seems to also happen in a few threads on the 2nd
> case, but most of the threads are Grizzly workers.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2013/9/12 Sébastien Lorber <lorber.sebastien_at_gmail.com>
>
>>
>>
>> Hi.
>>
>>
>> Thanks, it seems to work.
>>
>> I would suggest to throw IOException on the flush method since the feed
>> method is supposed to be called here
>>
>>
>> My implementation of flush is:
>>
>> @Override
>> public void flush() {
>> 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);
>> }
>> }
>>
>> Is this correct? The OutputStream redirects the bytes written to the
>> feed(Buffer) method
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> There seems to be some concurrency issue. Because the upload of 1 file
>> seems fine, but when using multiple threads, I often get the following
>> stack:
>> Caused by: java.io.IOException: Stream Closed
>> at java.io.FileInputStream.readBytes(Native Method)
>> at java.io.FileInputStream.read(FileInputStream.java:242)
>> at
>> com.google.common.io.CountingInputStream.read(CountingInputStream.java:62)
>> at java.io.FilterInputStream.read(FilterInputStream.java:133)
>> at java.io.FilterInputStream.read(FilterInputStream.java:107)
>> at com.ning.http.multipart.FilePart.sendData(FilePart.java:178)
>> at com.ning.http.multipart.Part.send(Part.java:331)
>> at com.ning.http.multipart.Part.sendParts(Part.java:397)
>>
>>
>> This is because the flush() method is called multiple times for the same
>> request on some cases.
>> I guess this is not supposed to happen.
>> What I understand is that the flush() method is supposed to be called
>> only once.
>>
>>
>> Using debug logging breakpoints I get the following:
>>
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.042 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 0 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.042 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 1 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.043 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 2 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.043 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 3 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.043 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 4 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.044 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 5 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.044 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 6 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.044 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 7 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.045 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 8 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.045 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 9 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.045 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 10 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.046 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 11 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.047 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 12 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.048 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 13 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.049 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 14 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.049 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 15 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.050 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 16 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.050 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 17 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.051 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 18 started
>> myapp--api-test 12/09/2013-12:20:46.051 [] [] [main] INFO
>> com.myapp.perf.DocumentUploadPerfIntegrationTest:77 - Thread 19 started
>> Adding handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_417de6ff
>> Adding handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_6c0d6ef7
>> Adding handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_7799b411
>> Adding handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_1c940409
>> Adding handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_480f9510
>> Adding handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_3e888183
>> Adding handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_17840db8
>> Adding handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_2cbad94b
>> Adding handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_64c0a4ae
>> Adding handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_102873a6
>> Adding handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_3d5d9ee8
>> Adding handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_51557949
>> Adding handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_6f95de2f
>> Adding handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_346d784c
>> Completing and removing handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_7799b411
>> *Completing and removing handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_5befaa07*
>> *Completing and removing handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_5befaa07*
>> *Completing and removing handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_5befaa07*
>> *Completing and removing handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_102873a6*
>> *Completing and removing handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_102873a6*
>> Completing and removing handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_346d784c
>> Completing and removing handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_64c0a4ae
>> Completing and removing handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_674735a8
>> Completing and removing handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_64c0a4ae
>> Completing and removing handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_480f9510
>> Completing and removing handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_6c0d6ef7
>> Completing and removing handshake listener for
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator_at_1daf8fd8
>>
>>
>> As you can see the same HandshakeListener seems to be called multiple
>> times for the same FeedableBodyGenerator
>>
>> When this happens, the stack is:
>>
>> at
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator$1.onComplete(FeedableBodyGenerator.java:198)
>> ~[async-http-client-1.7.20-SNAPSHOT.jar:na]
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLBaseFilter.notifyHandshakeComplete(SSLBaseFilter.java:880)
>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLFilter.notifyHandshakeComplete(SSLFilter.java:282)
>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.ssl.SSLBaseFilter.handleRead(SSLBaseFilter.java:275)
>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>> at
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider$SwitchingSSLFilter.handleRead(GrizzlyAsyncHttpProvider.java:2490)
>> ~[async-http-client-1.7.20-SNAPSHOT.jar:na]
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.filterchain.ExecutorResolver$9.execute(ExecutorResolver.java:119)
>> ~[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.nio.transport.TCPNIOTransport.fireIOEvent(TCPNIOTransport.java:546)
>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.strategies.AbstractIOStrategy.fireIOEvent(AbstractIOStrategy.java:113)
>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.strategies.WorkerThreadIOStrategy.run0(WorkerThreadIOStrategy.java:115)
>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.strategies.WorkerThreadIOStrategy.access$100(WorkerThreadIOStrategy.java:55)
>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.strategies.WorkerThreadIOStrategy$WorkerThreadRunnable.run(WorkerThreadIOStrategy.java:135)
>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.threadpool.AbstractThreadPool$Worker.doWork(AbstractThreadPool.java:565)
>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.threadpool.AbstractThreadPool$Worker.run(AbstractThreadPool.java:545)
>> ~[grizzly-framework-2.3.5.jar:2.3.5]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> So I tried with the following code:
>>
>> private boolean alreadyFlushed = false;
>> @Override
>> public synchronized void flush() {
>> if ( alreadyFlushed ) {
>> return;
>> }
>> startFeeding();
>> alreadyFlushed = true;
>> }
>>
>> It works fine when upload small files.
>>
>> But with larger files, I often get TimeoutException stacks for some of
>> the threads:
>>
>> Caused by: java.util.concurrent.TimeoutException
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.impl.SafeFutureImpl$Sync.innerGet(SafeFutureImpl.java:367)
>> at
>> org.glassfish.grizzly.impl.SafeFutureImpl.get(SafeFutureImpl.java:274)
>> at
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator$BaseFeeder.block(FeedableBodyGenerator.java:349)
>> at
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator$BaseFeeder.blockUntilQueueFree(FeedableBodyGenerator.java:339)
>> at
>> com.ning.http.client.providers.grizzly.FeedableBodyGenerator$BaseFeeder.feed(FeedableBodyGenerator.java:306)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Did I miss something?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/9/12 Ryan Lubke <ryan.lubke_at_oracle.com>
>>
>>> Committed another small change. Please make sure you're at the latest
>>> when you build.
>>>
>>> -rl
>>>
>>>
>>> Ryan Lubke wrote:
>>>
>>> Okay, I've committed another set of refactorings to the
>>> FeedableBodyGenerator.
>>>
>>> For your use case, you should extend
>>> FeedableBodyGenerator.SimpleFeeder.
>>>
>>> Let me know if you run into issues.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sébastien Lorber wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes I think it would, so that I can feed the queue at once
>>>
>>> One thread will be locked during the feeding for nothing but it's not a
>>> real problem in my usecase.
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/9/10 Ryan Lubke <ryan.lubke_at_oracle.com>
>>>
>>>> Would having a different listener that will be notified once async
>>>> transferring has been started work better for you?
>>>>
>>>> Something like:
>>>>
>>>> onAsyncTransferInitiated() {
>>>> // invoke your feed method
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sébastien Lorber wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>