Configuration of Thread Pool for CQ's Web Container

I am trying to detrmine whether there is any specific configuration for tuning the web container thread pool for CQ. The only configuration I observe is OSGi 's Apache Sling Event Thread Pool but tuning this does not directly correlate to the thread pool that is used for serving web requests by the publish instance.
Any help would be greatly appreciated as I work through tuning our CQ instance.

Unfortunately, the max thread settings is not exposed in CQ 5.5.However, all the other configurable settings (equivalent for server.xml) can be seen at [1]
[1] http://localhost:4502/system/console/configMgr/org.apache.felix.http
This is fixed in CQ 5.6 current release.
Thanks,
Varun

Similar Messages

Thread pools for execute queues

We've set up thread pools for several execute queues dedicated to high-load servlets
in our application. Once in a while, we get into a condition in which none of
these threads are available and then the threads never become available - we have
to restart the server.
I realize that this is a pretty generic description of the problem :-) but I wonder
if anyone else has encountered this and has an idea what might be causing it ?
Right now I am guessing that something in our code causes a resource contention
that eventually deadlocks all the threads. But that is just a guess.

Ethan,
"Ethan Allen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:3e0220a1$[email protected]..
Thanks, Dimitri and Slava !
I will do this and learn a little emore ...FYI, there is a web site dedicated to weblogic documentation -
http://e-docs.bea.com/
Pick your server version, go to "Search", type "thread dump".
Regards,
Slava Imeshev
>
ethan
"Slava Imeshev" <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Ethan,
For windows press <Ctrl>+<Break> in the server shell window,
for *nix send kill -3 {server PID}.
Regards,
Slava Imeshev
"Ethan Allen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:3e020fb4$[email protected]..
Thanks for your reply, Dimitri.
We have not looked at thread dumps. How may we do this ?
Ethan
"Dimitri I. Rakitine" <[email protected]> wrote:
Did you try looking at thread dumps when this happens ?
Ethan Allen <[email protected]> wrote:
We've set up thread pools for several execute queues dedicated to
high-load
servlets
in our application. Once in a while, we get into a condition in
which
none of
these threads are available and then the threads never become
available
- we have
to restart the server.
I realize that this is a pretty generic description of the problem:-) but I wonder
if anyone else has encountered this and has an idea what might be
causing
it ?
Right now I am guessing that something in our code causes a
resource
contention
that eventually deadlocks all the threads. But that is just a
guess.
>>>>
Dimitri

Custom thread pool for Java 8 parallel stream

It seems that it is not possible to specify thread pool for Java 8 parallel stream. If that's so, the whole functionality is useless in most of the situations. The only situation I can safely use it is a small single threaded application written by one person.
In all other cases, if I can not specify the thread pool, I have to share the default pool with other parts of the application. If someone submits a task that takes a lot of time, my tasks will get stuck. Is that correct or am I overlooking something?
Imagine that someone submits slow networking operation to the fork-join pool. It's not a good idea, but it's so tempting that it will be happening. In such case, all CPU intensive tasks executed on parallel streams will wait for the networking task to finish. There is nothing you can do to defend your part of the application against such situations. Is that so?

You are absolutely correct. That isn't the only problem with using the F/J framework as the parallel engine for bulk operations. Have a look http://coopsoft.com/ar/Calamity2Article.html

[svn] 1605: Bug: BLZ-155 - Deadlock using a thread pool for tomcat connectors

Revision: 1605
Author: [email protected]
Date: 2008-05-07 14:24:53 -0700 (Wed, 07 May 2008)
Log Message:
Bug: BLZ-155 - Deadlock using a thread pool for tomcat connectors
QA: Yes - Jorge verified in the QE lab
Doc: No
Ticket Links:
http://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/BLZ-155
Modified Paths:
blazeds/branches/3.0.x/modules/core/src/java/flex/messaging/client/EndpointPushNotifier.j ava

Cross post: http://forum.java.sun.com/thread.jspa?threadID=5215686&tstart=0
If you must post across forums, just post in the most relevant one and then give the link to that in the other posts.

Thread pool for Servlets

          Hi all,
          I am facing a big problem while doing a concurrent testing of my web application.
          I am testing with 60 concurrent users.
          I have set the database connection pool minimum capacity to 50, capacity increment
          to 10 and maximum capacity to 100.
          While there is no problem in getting database connection, the session variables
          are getting mixed up (i.e. the session variable for one user is coming up as that
          for another user!!!).
          Does it have something to do with configuring some pool for servlets threads or
          something?
          Please help.
          Thanks a lot in advance and best regards,
          Jaya


          Hi all,
          I am facing a big problem while doing a concurrent testing of my web application.
          I am testing with 60 concurrent users.
          I have set the database connection pool minimum capacity to 50, capacity increment
          to 10 and maximum capacity to 100.
          While there is no problem in getting database connection, the session variables
          are getting mixed up (i.e. the session variable for one user is coming up as that
          for another user!!!).
          Does it have something to do with configuring some pool for servlets threads or
          something?
          Please help.
          Thanks a lot in advance and best regards,
          Jaya

Servlet Thread Pools for iPlanet WS 4.1

We have iPlanet WS 4.1 SP 5, running on HP UX. Wanted to make sure servlets run fast, so set up servlet thread pool. Initial result was that even the startup servlet could not be loaded, got stack overflow. Reduced number of threads from 60 to 5. Now startup servlet kicked off OK, but a subsequent servlet processing a request bombed with same error. This is obviously some kind of resource issue; how does one allocate enough memory or whatever it needs to handle the thread pool? Do I really even need a thread pool?

Thanks, and a follow-up question: at that reference, it seemed to imply there is really no need to allocate a user thread pool if running on Unix. Could even slow down the application. Am I likely to be OK with about 300 concurrent users if I don't allocate a thread pool? I was afraid they'd be single-threaded through the front controller servlet if I did not specifically allocate and use a thread pool, but perhaps multiple threads are already built into the container?

Restricting Thread Pool for Servlet instances

I am using WebLogic5.1.0 version wherein I am registering a Servlet which
would be called by all the clients connecting
to my aplication. The servlet's service methods is taking some time to
execute. Since the servlet is following a SingleThreadModel, when there are
a large number of Clients connected, the number instances of Servlets
created are very high and the number of thread in the Application Server
process becomes very high affecting the performance of the other
applications.
Is it possible to restrict the number of instances of the servlets that get
created in the Application server ?
What are the setting required to achieve this ?
Sandeep

Hi.
I'm not aware of a property setting that allows you to restrict the number of
servlet instances in WLS for the SingleThreadModel. The number of execute
threads is fixed - it does not grow depending on load. You can set this value
in the weblogic.properties file by setting weblogic.system.executeThreadCount.
This value is 15 by default.
It does sound like you are reaching the max capability of your
server/hardware. You should try tuning WLS.
Here are a couple of suggestions:
1. Try adjusting the executeThreadCount value to a higher value. Start by
setting it to 30 - see if that makes any difference.
2. Check out the following tuning guide:
http://www.weblogic.com/docs51/admindocs/tuning.html
3. Here is a list of admin properties that might aid in tuning:
http://www.weblogic.com/docs51/adminhelp/AdminPropertyHelp.html
4. If you are still having problems you might do better by posting this issue
to the performance newsgroup.
Regards,
Michael
Sandeep Rajpathak wrote:
I am using WebLogic5.1.0 version wherein I am registering a Servlet which
would be called by all the clients connecting
to my aplication. The servlet's service methods is taking some time to
execute. Since the servlet is following a SingleThreadModel, when there are
a large number of Clients connected, the number instances of Servlets
created are very high and the number of thread in the Application Server
process becomes very high affecting the performance of the other
applications.
Is it possible to restrict the number of instances of the servlets that get
created in the Application server ?
What are the setting required to achieve this ?
Sandeep--
Michael Young
Developer Relations Engineer
BEA Support

Thread pool configuration for write-behind cache store operation?

Hi,
Does Coherence have a thread pool configuration for the Coherence CacheStore operation?
Or the CacheStore implementation needs to do that?
We're using write-behind and want to use multiple threads to speed up the store operation (storeAll()...)
Thanks in advance for your help.

user621063 wrote:
Hi,
Does Coherence have a thread pool configuration for the Coherence CacheStore operation?
Or the CacheStore implementation needs to do that?
We're using write-behind and want to use multiple threads to speed up the store operation (storeAll()...)
Thanks in advance for your help.Hi,
read/write-through operations are carried out on the worker thread (so if you configured a thread-pool for the service the same thread-pool will be used for the cache-store operation).
for write-behind/read-ahead operations, there is a single dedicated thread per cache above whatever thread-pool is configured, except for remove operations which are synchronous and still carried out on the worker thread (see above).
All above is of course per storage node.
Best regards,
Robert

The different thread pools in 6.1

Boy am I just flooded with just 6.1 migration issues. Life was much
simpler with weblogic.properties file.
Looking at Config.Dtd I couldnt see the different thread pools that WLS
5.1 offered.
How do I do set up thread pools for
a) Servlets
b) RMI
c) JMS
In 5.1 you had a servletthreadpool, an executethreadcount(for RMI) and a
jms thread pool.

In 6.1
There isn't any seperate execute ThreadPool for servlets.
The only thread pool that you can tune is the default
queue which can be done via console. Ofcourse you can
configure user defined thread queues.
Also there are some internal thread pools that are not
exposed to the developers. for e.g. admin queue, replication
queue , console queue , rmi queue , jms queue etc....
If you still want to route your servlet requests via a
seperate thread queue, you have to specify
the dispatch policy & the queue name.
see below
http://e-docs.bea.com/wls/docs61/perform/AppTuning.html#1105201
Kumar
Aswin Dinakar wrote:
Boy am I just flooded with just 6.1 migration issues. Life was much
simpler with weblogic.properties file.
Looking at Config.Dtd I couldnt see the different thread pools that WLS
5.1 offered.
How do I do set up thread pools for
a) Servlets
b) RMI
c) JMS
In 5.1 you had a servletthreadpool, an executethreadcount(for RMI) and a
jms thread pool.

Require a single App Pool for multiple websites in Azure Cloud Sevices

Hi All,
I am deploying multiple (very small) websites under one web role. The code set is identical but configured/DB per tenant. I am just getting this ready for production and have a huge road block where it is running out of memory. I have troubleshooted
this and its because it is allocating each website to its own app pool. It therefore has circa 500mb of ram allocated to each app pool after the app started. My websites don't require this segregation and as I wish to publish 50+ tiny websites
on one webrole, you can see my issue. 50*500mb. I have manually gone into the instance/IIS and moved the websites to one app role and it now works how I wish. The memory was released and even with every site under load, the increase in memory
is well within parameters. Can I please have some help in how I configure one app pool for all websites specified in the service definition please? Don't mind startup tasks as I already have those but not sure how it would know what the app pool
was called given its a GUID.
Thanks,
Steve.

Hi,
>> Don't mind startup tasks as I already have those but not sure how it would know what the app pool was called given its a GUID.
From my experience, you can write some code in the web role's OnStart method to alter application pool. You can refer to
http://blog.elastacloud.com/2011/01/26/windows-azure-apppool-settings-programmatic-modification/ for a sample.
However, you can also consider other approaches which may be better options. For instance, use a virtual machine which allows you to use UI to configure everything. Or use several WAWS Websites (free/shared) and host each small site as a single Website.
Those tires of Website does not offer all capability of web role, but if you just want to host a bunch of small sites which are rarely hit, they may save you the cost.
Best Regards,
Ming Xu
We are trying to better understand customer views on social support experience, so your participation in this interview project would be greatly appreciated if you have time. Thanks for helping make community forums a great place.
Click
HERE to participate the survey.

Coherence thread pools

Hi, i'm trying to understand how coherence uses various threads/thread-pools; in particular when interacting with a data store (which threads read, which threads write). In a stack trace dump, i see the following:
WriteBehindThread:CacheStoreWrapper($Proxy12): 30 of these threads.
DistributedWriteThroughWorker: 16 of these
DistributedCacheWorker: 16 of these
DistributedWriteBehindWorker: 16 of these
DistributedNonPersistentWorker: 16 of these
I'm guessing writes happen on the DistributedWriteThroughWorker and DistributedWriteBehindWorker threads, but what about reads? And what are the other thread pools for?
Thanks.

Hi,
WriteBehindThread:CacheStoreWrapper($Proxy12):
These are the write behind threads for your write behind caches - in this case caches mapped to the DistributedWriteBehind service. There are 30 of them as there is one per cache. These will fire up periodically (depending on the write-delay) and write any pending inserts/updates to the DB. Deletes are done on the worker thread or service thread if you have no worker threads (i.e. a thread count of zero).
DistributedWriteThroughWorker:
These are the worker threads for the DistributedWriteThrough service. They process most of the operations that are requested on caches mapped to the DistributedWriteThrough service. There are 16 as you have probably set the thread-count in the cache configuration file to 16.
DistributedCacheWorker:
These are the worker threads for the DistributedCache service. They process most of the operations that are requested on caches mapped to the DistributedCache service. There are 16 as you have probably set the thread-count in the cache configuration file to 16.
DistributedWriteBehindWorker:
These are the worker threads for the DistributedWriteBehind service. They process most of the operations that are requested on caches mapped to the DistributedWriteBehind service. There are 16 as you have probably set the thread-count in the cache configuration file to 16.
DistributedNonPersistentWorker:
These are the worker threads for the DistributedNonPersistent service. They process most of the operations that are requested on caches mapped to the DistributedNonPersistent service. There are 16 as you have probably set the thread-count in the cache configuration file to 16.
You will also see you have these threads
DistributedCache:DistributedWriteThrough
DistributedCache:DistributedCache
DistributedCache:DistributedWriteBehind
DistributedCache:DistributedNonPersistent
These are the service threads for the respective services - there is only ever one of these per service. These allocate tasks to the worker threads and are also responsible for processing certain tasks themselves. If you set a thread count of zero for a service then all you will have no worker threads and requests will be processed by the service thread.
If you manage to ever deadlock your cluster it is usually because you have deadlocked a service thread or worker threads so if the cluster is grinding to a halt this is typically where I would look first in a thread dump.
JK

CORBA thread pools

Is there a code sample that takes a CORBA request and passes it to an available
thread in a thread pool. All the multi-threaded examples I have seen seem to rely
on creating a thread on receipt of a request/creation of an object, which could
be quite inefficient.
-Giles Cory

Ethan,
"Ethan Allen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:3e0220a1$[email protected]..
Thanks, Dimitri and Slava !
I will do this and learn a little emore ...FYI, there is a web site dedicated to weblogic documentation -
http://e-docs.bea.com/
Pick your server version, go to "Search", type "thread dump".
Regards,
Slava Imeshev
>
ethan
"Slava Imeshev" <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Ethan,
For windows press <Ctrl>+<Break> in the server shell window,
for *nix send kill -3 {server PID}.
Regards,
Slava Imeshev
"Ethan Allen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:3e020fb4$[email protected]..
Thanks for your reply, Dimitri.
We have not looked at thread dumps. How may we do this ?
Ethan
"Dimitri I. Rakitine" <[email protected]> wrote:
Did you try looking at thread dumps when this happens ?
Ethan Allen <[email protected]> wrote:
We've set up thread pools for several execute queues dedicated to
high-load
servlets
in our application. Once in a while, we get into a condition in
which
none of
these threads are available and then the threads never become
available
- we have
to restart the server.
I realize that this is a pretty generic description of the problem:-) but I wonder
if anyone else has encountered this and has an idea what might be
causing
it ?
Right now I am guessing that something in our code causes a
resource
contention
that eventually deadlocks all the threads. But that is just a
guess.
>>>>
Dimitri

The problem in the thread pool implemented by myself

Hello, I need to a thread pool in J2ME CDC 1.0 + FP 1.0, so I implemented a simple one by myself that also meets my own requirement.
Here is the main idea:
The thread pool creates a fixed number of threads in advance. When a task comes, it is put in the waiting list. All threads tries to get the tasks from the waiting list. If no task exists, the threads wait until someone wakes them up.
Here are the requirements from myself:
1. when a task has finished its work in one execution, it is put in the waiting list for the next run.
2. the task can control the delay between when the task owner tries to put it in the waiting list and when the task is actually put in the waiting list. I need this function because sometimes I don't want the tasks to run too often and want to save some CPU usage.
In my program, I creates two thread pools. In one pool, every task don't use the delay, and the thread pool works very well. The other pool has the tasks that use the delay, and sometimes, as I can see from the printed information, there are many tasks in the waiting list but 0 or 1 thread executes tasks. It seems that the waiting threads cannot wake up when new tasks comes.
I suspect the code in addTask(), but cannot find the reason why it fails. Could anyone please help me find out the bug in my code? I put the code of thread pool below
Thank you in advance
Zheng Da
ThreadPool.java
package j2me.concurrent;
import java.util.LinkedList;
import java.util.Timer;
import java.util.TimerTask;
import alvis.general.Util;
public class ThreadPool {
     private int maxQueueSize;
     private boolean running = true;
     private Thread[] threads;
     private LinkedList tasks = new LinkedList();
     private Timer timer = new Timer(true);
     private AtomicInteger usingThreads = new AtomicInteger(0);
     private synchronized boolean isRunning() {
          return running;
     private synchronized void stopRunning() {
          running = false;
     private synchronized PoolTask getTask() {
          while (tasks.isEmpty() && isRunning()) {
               try {
                    this.wait();
               } catch (InterruptedException e) {
                    e.printStackTrace();
          if (tasks.isEmpty())
               return null;
          // Util.log.info(Thread.currentThread().getName() +
          // " gets a task, left tasks: " + tasks.size());
          return (PoolTask) tasks.removeFirst();
     private synchronized void addTaskNoDelay(PoolTask task) {
          tasks.addLast(task);
          notifyAll();
     private synchronized void addTask(final PoolTask task) {
          long delay = task.delay();
          if (delay == 0) {
               addTaskNoDelay(task);
          } else {
               timer.schedule(new TimerTask() {
                    public void run() {
                         addTaskNoDelay(task);
               }, delay);
     private synchronized int numTasks() {
          return tasks.size();
     private class PoolThread extends Thread {
          public void run() {
               Util.poolThreads.inc();
               while (isRunning()) {
                    PoolTask task = getTask();
                    if (task == null) {
                         Util.poolThreads.dec();
                         return;
                    usingThreads.inc();
                    long currentTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
                    task.run();
                    long elapsedTime = System.currentTimeMillis() - currentTime;
                    if (elapsedTime > 100)
                         System.err.println(task.toString() + " takes " + ((double) elapsedTime)/1000 + "s");
                    usingThreads.dec();
                    if (!task.finish()) {
                         addTask(task);
               Util.poolThreads.dec();
     public ThreadPool(int size, int taskQueueSize) {
          maxQueueSize = taskQueueSize;
          threads = new Thread[size];
          for (int i = 0; i < threads.length; i++) {
               threads[i] = new PoolThread();
               threads.start();
     public synchronized boolean executor(PoolTask task) {
          if (!isRunning()) {
               return false;
          Util.log.info("Thread Pool gets " + task + ", there are "
                    + numTasks() + " waiting tasks");
          if (numTasks() >= maxQueueSize) {
               return false;
          addTask(task);
          return true;
     public synchronized void destroy() {
          stopRunning();
          timer.cancel();
          // TODO: I am not sure it can wake up all threads and destroy them.
          this.notifyAll();
     public synchronized void printSnapshot() {
          System.err.println("using threads: " + usingThreads + ", remaining tasks: " + tasks.size());
PoolTask.javapackage j2me.concurrent;
public interface PoolTask extends Runnable {
     * It shows if the task has already finished.
     * If it isn't, the task will be put in the thread pool for the next execution.
     * @return
     boolean finish();
     * It shows the delay in milliseconds that the task is put in the thread pool.
     * @return
     long delay();

are receiving/sends tasks packets time consuming operation in your case or not? if it is not you do not need to use thread pools at all. you can create a queue like in your code through the linked list and dispatch this queue periodically with minimum monitor usage. try this.
import java.util.LinkedList;
public class PacketDispatcher extends Thread {
    LinkedList list = new LinkedList();
    public PacketDispatcher (String name) {
        super(name);
    public void putTask(Task task) {
        synchronized (list) {
            list
                    .add(task);
            list.notify();
    public void run() {
        while (true/* your condition */) {
            Task task = null;
            synchronized (list) {
                while (list.isEmpty())
                    try {
                        list.wait();
                    } catch (InterruptedException e) {
                        e.printStackTrace();
                task = (Task)list
                        .poll();
            if (task == null) {
                try {
                    Thread
                            .sleep(1);
                } catch (InterruptedException e) {
                    e.printStackTrace();
                continue;
            task
                    .run();
            if (!task.isFinished()) {
                putTask(task);
            Thread
                    .yield();
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        // just for test
        try {
            Thread.sleep (10000);
        } catch (InterruptedException e) {
            // TODO Auto-generated catch block
            e.printStackTrace();
        PacketDispatcher dispatcher = new PacketDispatcher("Packet Dispatcher");
        Task task = new Task();
        dispatcher.putTask(task);
        dispatcher.start();
        try {
            Thread.sleep (10000);
        } catch (InterruptedException e) {
            // TODO Auto-generated catch block
            e.printStackTrace();
        Task task2 = new Task();
        dispatcher.putTask(task2);
class Task {
    long result = 0;
    public boolean isFinished () {
        if (getResult() >= 10000000) {
            return true;
        return false;
    public void run() {
        for (int i = 0; i < 1000; i++) {
            result += i;
    public long getResult () {
        return result;
}

Fixed Size Thread Pool which infinitely serve task submitted to it

Hi,
I want to create a fixed size thread pool say of size 100 and i will submit around 200 task to it.
Now i want it to serve them infinitely i.e once all tasks are completed re-do them again and again.
public void start(Vector<String> addresses)
      //Create a Runnable object of each address in "addresses"
       Vector<FindAgentRunnable> runnables = new Vector<FindAgentRunnable>(1,1);
        for (String address : addresses)
            runnables.addElement(new FindAgentRunnable(address));
       //Create a thread pool of size 100
        ExecutorService pool = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(100);
        //Here i added all the runnables to the thread pool
         for(FindAgentRunnable runnable : runnables)
                pool.submit(runnable);
            pool.shutdown();
}Now i wants that this thread pool execute the task infinitely i.e once all the tasks are done then restart all the tasks again.
I have also tried to add then again and again but it throws a java.util.concurrent.RejectedExecutionException
public void start(Vector<String> addresses)
      //Create a Runnable object of each address in "addresses"
       Vector<FindAgentRunnable> runnables = new Vector<FindAgentRunnable>(1,1);
        for (String address : addresses)
            runnables.addElement(new FindAgentRunnable(address));
       //Create a thread pool of size 100
        ExecutorService pool = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(100);
        for(;;)
            for(FindAgentRunnable runnable : runnables)
                pool.submit(runnable);
            pool.shutdown();
            try
                pool.awaitTermination(Long.MAX_VALUE, TimeUnit.SECONDS);
            catch (InterruptedException ex)
                Logger.getLogger(AgentFinder.class.getName()).log(Level.SEVERE, null, ex);
}Can anybody help me to solve this problem?
Thnx in advance.

Ravi_Gupta wrote:
*@ kajbj*
so what should i do?
can you suggest me a solution?Consider this thread "closed". Continue to post in your other thread. I, and all others don't want to give answers that already have been given.

Cold Fusion in a generic thread pool and enabling JAVA don't mix

I've got Cold Fusion MX installed on a server running Sun One 6.1. I ran into a problem trying to enable JAVA (for servlet support) which I had previous disabled because I didn't use it.
Well, when I went to enable JAVA on the server last week, the service wouldn't restart and the error logs gave me no indication of the problem.
Through a tedious trial-and-error process I've found that having Cold Fusion running under a generic thread pool while trying to have JAVA (the j2ee plugin) running under Sun One simply doesn't work (for whatever reason).
Once I killed the pool, everything runs fine.
Does anyone happen to know why this is? I keep CFMX under its own thread pool because there are certain elements to CFMX that aren't wholly stable and can result in CFMX crashing. If it crashes, the process keeps accepting requests, but never processes them. I'd like to keep the native thread pool free to keep accepting non-CFMX requests even when CFMX crashes.
Thus the separate thread pool for CFMX.
But now I can't run CFMX in a separate thread pool with JAVA enabled.
Anyone have any insights into why this is?
Thanks

Two things. Firstly, it's better to use private static final Object classLock = new Object();because that saves you worrying about whether any other code synchronises on it. Secondly, if you do decide to go for the delegation route then java.lang.reflect.Proxy may be a good way forward.

Configuration of Thread Pool for CQ's Web Container

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for