Hmm,
can you pls. provide the testcase, because I can't reproduce the problem
after the change I made.
Thanks.
WBR,
Alexey.
On 16.03.15 00:30, Broide Uri wrote:
>
> Hi Alexey,
>
> Right, even started is reported wrong as you can see from the
> screenshot below (that was taken NOT under load).
>
> And yes we verified that it is the right version (2.3.20-SNAPSHOT)
>
> Thanks
>
> Uri
>
> *From:*Oleksiy Stashok [mailto:oleksiy.stashok_at_oracle.com]
> *Sent:* Sunday, March 15, 2015 5:21 PM
> *To:* users_at_grizzly.java.net
> *Subject:* Re: Grizzly Thread Pool Monitoring
>
> Hi Uri,
>
> you mean even "started" is reported wrong?
> It should be something wrong with the version you picked up.
>
> Did you use this snapshots repository:
> https://maven.java.net/content/repositories/snapshots/
> <http://cp.mcafee.com/d/5fHCNEg6gUqdEI9KccFL6zB4TsSCyPtdB55dUSCyPtdB5ZdUSCyPtB5UsYOrhLtZNdxddYST6n48RAxUanc_6DYKrnc_6DYKrs7cW_tZ_HYy-OqekNPfnKnjjupVdYttVMQsYJt6OaaJS6ul3PWApmU6CQjqpK_9IInojvvpjdTdAVPmEBCaWp-72eCtU6VqI9_2uhZqJ9jH6nQOAdmEjHeC6SWv6xuFy7N1h6cxgkfbs8WpTwqrhu79FLCMnWhEw2kp2wEumd4099N_k3h05GRfd40Tm4FRza14SOMrnVhOYlH0>
>
> Thank you.
>
> WBR,
> Alexey.
>
> On 15.03.15 01:47, Broide Uri wrote:
>
> Hi Alexey,
>
> Unfortunately the fix doesn’t work. Can we gather some more
> information on this?
>
> Please note that we have a protection mechanism that monitors the
> usage of the thread pools, and currently it blocks traffic based
> on wrong reporting in the thread pool JMX objects.
>
> Thanks
>
> Uri
>
> *From:*Oleksiy Stashok [mailto:oleksiy.stashok_at_oracle.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 11, 2015 9:22 PM
> *To:* users_at_grizzly.java.net <mailto:users_at_grizzly.java.net>
> *Subject:* Re: Grizzly Thread Pool Monitoring
>
> Hi Uri,
>
>
> On 11.03.15 07:54, Broide Uri wrote:
>
> 1.We opened the requested BUG (GRIZZLY-1748
> <http://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndzgQrhojshKye7c6XCQQmrFIEEFL6QQmrFIELFL6QQmrIEL3DCjqdXLK9I9FLCSUOUx6IAf1iVDUQ_BPqVDUQ_BPrZT3hPuXX_nV5wsMzvHTbFTovVdVBNV7BHFShhlhKPOEuvkzaT0QSyrhdTV5MQsFIT7e6zBcTsSjDdqymo8WpTwrwzaeUgzkNjY2gb3g90AawsKyeoudJQ-d2Zj4fy2ycp2wEumUhQPL0QSyZtB5MS2_id40iz8k53ONEw19efWwq80JmFVEw6WMBeIpg8CSm3qCJWcYkr>).
>
> 2.Can you answer my Questions below
>
> The questions are as follows:
>
> 1.Are we looking on the right MBean attributes?
>
> Yes.
>
>
>
> 2.Assuming 1 is true, then why for the same load model the thread
> pool is reaching this high number (max = core + allocated)?
>
> It's because the probe values reported based on events coming from
> the thread pool and at the time of probe registration some events
> are already missed.
>
>
>
> 3.Why the *thread-pool-started* attribute is false?
>
> same as above.
>
> I think I've fixed the issue, can you pls. check the latest
> 2.3.20-SNAPSHOT?
>
> Thanks.
>
> WBR,
> Alexey.
>
>
>
>
> *From:*Oleksiy Stashok [mailto:oleksiy.stashok_at_oracle.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 10, 2015 8:15 PM
> *To:* users_at_grizzly.java.net <mailto:users_at_grizzly.java.net>
> *Subject:* Re: Grizzly Thread Pool Monitoring
>
> Hi Uri,
>
> looks like a bug to me, 12 core threads are not counted as allocated.
> Can you pls. file an issue?
>
> Thanks.
>
> WBR,
> Alexey.
>
> On 10.03.15 10:26, Broide Uri wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> We are performing Stability load run against our Grizzly based
> application.
>
> We are trying to determine how to monitor the Thread Pool
> usage via JMX.
>
> We are looking at the ThreadPool MBean
> (org.glassfish.grizzly:pp=/gmbal-root/TCPNIOTransport[EndPoint.IMAP.NON_SECURED],type=ThreadPool,name=ThreadPool),
> on the following attributes:
>
> ·thread-pool-max-num-threads
>
> ·thread-pool-allocated-thread-count
>
> ·thread-pool-core-pool-size
>
> We have conducted 2 load runs (with *_exactly_* the same load
> model):
>
> 1.max threads was configured to be *200* (verified against
> thread-pool-max-num-threads)
>
> ofrom some point of the load run the
> *thread-pool-allocated-thread-count* was stabilized on 188
>
> o*thread-pool-core-pool-size* was fixed on 12
>
> 2.max threads was configured to be *300* (verified against
> thread-pool-max-num-threads)
>
> ofrom some point of the load run the
> *thread-pool-allocated-thread-count* was stabilized on 288
>
> o*thread-pool-core-pool-size* was fixed on 12
>
> The questions are as follows:
>
> 1.Are we looking on the right MBean attributes?
>
> 2.Assuming 1 is true, then why for the same load model the
> thread pool is reaching this high number (max = core + allocated)?
>
> 3.Why the *thread-pool-started* attribute is false?
>
> Attaching the JConsole print screen of the second run
>
> cid:image001.png_at_01D05B52.9D7A53B0
>
> Thanks
>
> Uri
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> “This e-mail message may contain confidential, commercial or
> privileged information that constitutes proprietary
> information of Comverse Inc. or its subsidiaries. If you are
> not the intended recipient of this message, you are hereby
> notified that any review, use or distribution of this
> information is absolutely prohibited and we request that you
> delete all copies and contact us by e-mailing to:
> security_at_comverse.com <mailto:security_at_comverse.com>. Thank You.”
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> “This e-mail message may contain confidential, commercial or
> privileged information that constitutes proprietary information of
> Comverse Inc. or its subsidiaries. If you are not the intended
> recipient of this message, you are hereby notified that any
> review, use or distribution of this information is absolutely
> prohibited and we request that you delete all copies and contact
> us by e-mailing to: security_at_comverse.com
> <mailto:security_at_comverse.com>. Thank You.”
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> “This e-mail message may contain confidential, commercial or
> privileged information that constitutes proprietary information of
> Comverse Inc. or its subsidiaries. If you are not the intended
> recipient of this message, you are hereby notified that any
> review, use or distribution of this information is absolutely
> prohibited and we request that you delete all copies and contact
> us by e-mailing to: security_at_comverse.com
> <mailto:security_at_comverse.com>. Thank You.”
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> “This e-mail message may contain confidential, commercial or
> privileged information that constitutes proprietary information of
> Comverse Inc. or its subsidiaries. If you are not the intended
> recipient of this message, you are hereby notified that any review,
> use or distribution of this information is absolutely prohibited and
> we request that you delete all copies and contact us by e-mailing to:
> security_at_comverse.com. Thank You.”