Servlet thread pool

Is there any way I can create my own init() for the threads in the servlet thread pool (by overriding some method or through other means)? (Not to be confused with the servlet's init().)

web server itself is a thread pool implementation, unlesss your thread has other purpose, if not it is suited and enough for you do not implement another thread for it. If you want some init method, you can call from other class before start of your thread pooling.
Hopefully can help you...

Similar Messages

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?

Thread pool in servlet container

Hello all,
I'm working on this webapp that has some bad response times and I've identified an area were we could shave off a considerable amount of time. The app is invoking a component that causes data to be catched for subsequently targeted apps in the environemnt. Our app does not need to wait for a response so I'd like to make this an asyncronous call. So, how best to implement this?...I considered JMS, but started working on a solution using the Java 1.4 backport of JSR 166 (java.util.concurrent).
I've been testing the use of a ThreadPoolExecutor, using an ArrayBlockingQueue. The work that each Runnable will perform involves a lot of waiting (the component we call invokes a web service, among a couple other distributed calls). So I figure the pool will be much larger than the queue. Our container has 35 execute threads, so I've been testing with a thread pool size of 25, and a queue of 10.
Any thoughts on this approach? I understand that some of this work could be simplified by JMS, but if I don't need to be tied to the container, I'd prefer not to. The code if much easier to unit test, and plays nicely with our continious build integration (which runs our junit test for us and notifies on errors).
Any thoughts are greatly appreciated...Thanks!!

Well, if it works, that's by far the best way to go - but note that creating threads in a servlet container means those threads are outside of the container's control. Many containers will refuse to give the new threads access to the JNDI context, even, and some may prevent you from creating threads at all.

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

JRun Thread Pool Issue

I'm running CF 9.0.1 on Ubuntu on an "Medium" Amazon EC2 instance. CF has been crashing intermittently (several times per day). At such times, running top gets me this (or something similar):
PID
USER
PR
NI
VIRT
RES
SHR
S
%CPU
%MEM
TIME+COMMAND
15855
wwwrun
20
0
1762m
730m
20m
S
99.3
19.4
13:22.96 coldfusion9
So, it's obviously consuming most of the server resources. The following error has been showing up in my cfserver.log in the leadup to each crash:
java.lang.RuntimeException: Request timed out waiting for an available thread to run. You may want to consider increasing the number of active threads in the thread pool.
If I run /opt/coldfusion9/bin/coldfusion status, I get:
Pg/Sec DB/Sec CP/Sec Reqs Reqs Reqs AvgQ   AvgReq AvgDB Bytes Bytes
Now Hi Now Hi Now Hi Q'ed Run'g TO'ed Time   Time   Time   In/Sec Out/Sec
0   0   0   0   -1 -1 150   25    0     0      -1352560      0      0
In the administrator, under Server Settings > Request Tuning, the setting for Maximum number of simultaneous Template requests is 25. So this makes sense so far. I could just increase the thread pool to cover these sort of load spikes. I could make it 200. (Which I did just now as a test.)
However, there's also this file /opt/coldfusion9/runtime/servers/coldfusion/SERVER-INF/jrun.xml. And some of the settings in there appear to conflict. For example, it reads:
<service class="jrunx.scheduler.SchedulerService" name="SchedulerService">
<attribute name="bindToJNDI">true</attribute>
<attribute name="activeHandlerThreads">25</attribute>
<attribute name="maxHandlerThreads">1000</attribute>
<attribute name="minHandlerThreads">20</attribute>
<attribute name="threadWaitTimeout">180</attribute>
<attribute name="timeout">600</attribute>
</service>
Which a) has fewer active threads (what does this mean?), and b) has a max threads that exceed the simultaneous request limit set in the admin. So, I'm not sure. Are these independent configs that need to be made to match manually? Or is the jrun.xml file supposed to be written by the CF Admin when changes are made there? Hmm. But maybe this is different because presumably the CF Scheduler should only use a subset of all available threads, right...so we'd always have some threads for real live users. We also have this in there:
<service class="jrun.servlet.http.WebService" name="WebService">
<attribute name="port">8500</attribute>
<attribute name="interface">*</attribute>
<attribute name="deactivated">true</attribute>
<attribute name="activeHandlerThreads">200</attribute>
<attribute name="minHandlerThreads">1</attribute>
<attribute name="maxHandlerThreads">1000</attribute>
<attribute name="mapCheck">0</attribute>
<attribute name="threadWaitTimeout">300</attribute>
<attribute name="backlog">500</attribute>
<attribute name="timeout">300</attribute>
</service>
This appears to have changed when I changed the CF Admin setting...maybe...but it's the activeHandlerThreads that matches my new maximum simulataneous requests setting...rather than the maxHandlerThreads, which again exceeds it. Finally, we have this:
<service class="jrun.servlet.jrpp.JRunProxyService" name="ProxyService">
<attribute name="activeHandlerThreads">200</attribute>
<attribute name="minHandlerThreads">1</attribute>
<attribute name="maxHandlerThreads">1000</attribute>
<attribute name="mapCheck">0</attribute>
<attribute name="threadWaitTimeout">300</attribute>
<attribute name="backlog">500</attribute>
<attribute name="deactivated">false</attribute>
<attribute name="interface">*</attribute>
<attribute name="port">51800</attribute>
<attribute name="timeout">300</attribute>
<attribute name="cacheRealPath">true</attribute>
</service>
So, I'm not certain which (if any) of these I should change and what exactly the relationship is between maximum requests and maximum threads. Also, since several of these list the maxHandlerThreads as 1000, I'm wondering if I should just set the maximum simultaneous requests to 1000. There must be some upper limit that depends on available server resources...but I'm not sure what it is and I don't really want to play around with it since it's a production environment.
I'm not sure if it pertains to this issue at all, but when I run a ps aux | grep coldfusion I get the following:
wwwrun   15853 0.0 0.0   8704   760 pts/1
S
20:22   0:00 /opt/coldfusion9/runtime/bin/coldfusion9 -jar jrun.jar -autorestart -start coldfusion
wwwrun   15855 5.4 18.2 1678552 701932 pts/1
Sl
20:22   1:38 /opt/coldfusion9/runtime/bin/coldfusion9 -jar jrun.jar -start coldfusion
There are always these two and never more than these two processes. So there does not appear to be a one-to-one relationship between processes and threads. I recall from an MX 6.1 install I maintained for many years that additional CF processes were visible in the process list. It seemed to me at the time like I had a process for each thread...so either I was wrong or something is quite different in version 9 since it's reporting 25 running requests and only showing these two processes. If a single process can have multiple threads in the background, then I'm given to wonder why I have two processes instead of one...just curious.
So, anyway, I've been experimenting while composing this post. As noted above I adjusted the maximum simulataneous requests up to 200. I was hoping this would solve my problem, but CF just crashed again (rather it slogged down and requests started timing out...so effectively "crashed"). This time, top looked similar (still consuming more than 99% of the CPU), but CF status looked different:
Pg/Sec DB/Sec CP/Sec Reqs Reqs Reqs AvgQ   AvgReq AvgDB Bytes Bytes
Now Hi Now Hi Now Hi Q'ed Run'g TO'ed Time   Time   Time   In/Sec Out/Sec
0   0   0   0   -1 -1 0     150   0     0      0      0      0      0
Obviously, since I'd increased the maximum simultaneous requests, it was allowing more requests to run simultaneously...but it was still maxing out the server resources.
Further experiments (after restarting CF) showed me that the server became unusably slogged after about 30-35 "Reqs Run'g", with all additional requests headed for an inevitible timeout:
Pg/Sec DB/Sec CP/Sec Reqs Reqs Reqs AvgQ   AvgReq AvgDB Bytes Bytes
Now Hi Now Hi Now Hi Q'ed Run'g TO'ed Time   Time   Time   In/Sec Out/Sec
0   0   0   0   -1 -1 0     33    0     0      -492   0      0      0
So, it's clear that increasing the maximum simultaneous requests has not helped. I guess what it comes down to is this: What is it having such a hard time with? Where are these spikes coming from? Bursts of traffic? On what pages? What requests are running at any given time? I guess I simply need more information to continue troubleshooting. If there are long-running requests, or other issues, I'm not seeing it in the logs (although I do have that option checked in the admin). I need to know which requests exactly are those responsible for these spikes. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks.
~Day

I really appreciate your help. However, I haven't been able to find the JRun Thread settings you describe above.
Under Request Tuning, I see:
Server Settings > Request Tuning
Request Limits
Maximum number of simultaneous Template requests
Restricts the number of simultaneously processed requests. Use this setting to increase overall system performance for heavy load applications. Requests beyond the specified limit are queued. On Standard Edition, you must restart ColdFusion to enable this setting.
Maximum number of simultaneous Flash Remoting requests
The number of Flash Remoting requests that can be processed concurrently.
Maximum number of simultaneous Web Service requests
The number of Web Service requests that can be processed concurrently.
Maximum number of simultaneous CFC function requests
The number of ColdFusion Component methods that can be processed concurrently via HTTP. This does not affect invocation of CFC methods from within CFML, only methods requested via an HTTP request.
Tag Limit Settings
Maximum number of simultaneous Report threads
The maximum number of ColdFusion reports that can be processed concurrently.
Maximum number of threads available for CFTHREAD
The maximum number of threads created by CFTHREAD that will be run concurrently. Threads created by CFTHREAD in excess of this are queued. On Standard Edition, the maximum limit is 10.
And under Java and JVM, I see:
Server Settings > Java and JVM
    Java and JVM settings control the way ColdFusion starts the Java Virtual Machine when it starts. You can control settings like what classpaths are used and how memory is allocated as well as add custom command line arguments. Changing these settings requires restarting ColdFusion. If you enter an incorrect setting, ColdFusion may not restart properly.
   Backups of the jvm.config file are created when you hit the submit button. You can use this backup to restore from a critical change.
   Java Virtual Machine Path
Specifies the location of the Java Virtual Machine.
   Minimum JVM Heap Size (MB)         Maximum JVM Heap Size (MB)
   The Memory Size settings determine the amount of memory that the JVM can use for programs and data.
   ColdFusion Class Path
Specifies any additional class paths for the JVM, with multiple directories separated by commas.
   JVM Arguments
-server -Dsun.io.useCanonCaches=false -XX:MaxPermSize=192m -XX:+UseParallelGC -Xbatch -Dcoldfusion.rootDir={application.home}/../ -Dcoldfusion.libPath={application.home}/../lib
Specifies any specific JVM initialization options, separated by spaces.
I did go take a look at FusionReactor and found it's not free (which would be fine, of course, if it would actually help). It looks like there's a fully functional demo, which is cool...but I've haven't been able to get it to install yet, so we'll see.
Thanks again!
~Day
(By the way, I've cross-posted this inquiry on StackOverflow. So if you're able to help me arrive at a solution you might want to answer there as well.)

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.

On Threads, Pools and other beasts

I'm seeing some unexpected behaviours in our production system relating to
(AFAICS) threads and connection pools, and hope you could bring some info
about them.
Our system is built over 4 PIII Xeon processors under Linux.
We do currently have this configuration:
15 threads for the "default" queue and 10 for an special servlet one, we
decided to separate threads in two queues in order to assure our users get
always a thread besides what the rest of the system is "doing".
Even we do not have a lot of users (about 20 or so) they do generate a lot
of load as for the bussiness logic inherent to the application.
For sample, so you can understand what goes with practically any user
"action", think on this.
After a user "confirms" some data via a servlet and after executing the data
validation and bussines rules some messages are sent via JMS to the
"asynchronous" part of the system (that is running in the same weblogic
instance). After commiting the user transaction an thus releasing the
servlet thread, so it can be used by the same or other user, JMS messages
are delivered to MDBs that must transform information from on-line (servlet)
processes in different ways so they can be stored onto other systems, i.e.
into a mainframe, into an XML DB and possibly into another RDBMS. Our
configuration is that there can be as much as 10 MDB of each type (I mean
for each kind of "action" of a servlet) running concurrently and as you can
suppose those processes do take some time to communicate with destination
systems and perform their work.
We end at last with a lot of concurrent processes in our system that ends
some time with the users complaining about system responsiveness.
After all this explanation I would like to know if 25 threads for
"background" and on-line processes is too low (as I'm afraid they are). The
problem is we can't seem to increase the number of threads without being
very careful with JDBC connection pools.
Currently we have two connection pools. We do demarcate transactions in the
clients (servlets, batch processes) we have a "transacted" pool and a "non
transacted" one.
We are delegating persistence to the contanier (formally in our case we are
using TopLink persistence and it uses in it's deployment descriptor both
types of pools)
Our configuration is as follows:
Oracle pool NON Tx 60 connections
Oracle pool Tx 30 connections
initially we create 5 connections for each pool with an increment of 5 for
each one too.
From the tests I have made I have discovered that setting more threads than
the minimum amount of pools yields to this exception:
weblogic.common.ResourceException: No available connections in pool
myNonTxPool
at
weblogic.common.internal.ResourceAllocator.reserve(ResourceAllocator.java:57
8)
at
weblogic.common.internal.ResourceAllocator.reserve(ResourceAllocator.java:40
5)
at
weblogic.common.internal.ResourceAllocator.reserveNoWait(ResourceAllocator.j
ava:373)
at
weblogic.jdbc.common.internal.ConnectionPool.reserve(ConnectionPool.java:165
at
weblogic.jdbc.common.internal.ConnectionPool.reserveNoWait(ConnectionPool.ja
va:126)
at
weblogic.jdbc.common.internal.RmiDataSource.getPoolConnection(RmiDataSource.
java:194)
at
weblogic.jdbc.common.internal.RmiDataSource.getConnection(RmiDataSource.java
:219)
the behaviour I would expect is that in case a thread needs a connection and
there isn't any one available the thread may be blocked and it would receive
the connecion once one is released, of course as I can see in the stack the
ConnectionPool.reserveNoWait() method is behaving just the other way.
The main problem with this is that as you can see we are "forced" to spend
90 (60+30) connections to the DB (even we will never use more than 25
(15+10) simultaneously just because we must assure that at least there is
one "reserved" connection to each thread.
Our DBA thinks that it can't be possible that we spend such number of
connections that could be taken by another application(s) (as the DB is
shared with other apps)
Currently our DB system is not set as "multithreaded" so each connection
created against the DB is a process on the system and of course they are a
really scarce resource.
My question is. What would be a "fine" number of threads for an application
like this that is mainly "background-batch processing" but assuring on-line
users have their threads always available?
I have just another doubt (maybe this is not the right thread to ask for it
but...) how does the UserTransaction actually works? I mean, is the
connection given to the thread (and thus extracted from pool) as soon as the
thread begin it's work? or is it given in the instant of "commiting" to the
DB. I know maybe using TopLink changes default Weblogic CMP behaviour but I
would like to know what the "default" Weblogic behaviour is; and, what
happens when you don't start a transaction in the client and total execution
time exceeds 30 seconds? I have seen a rollback due to "exceeding" those 30
seconds althought I'm sure we do not open any transaction, what kind of
"transaction" is that? Is just a way of Weblogic to assure a thread is not
"locked" more than a certain period of time so the system never "stalls"?
Thanks in advance.
Regards.
Ignacio.

Hi Ignacio,
See my answer inline.
"Ignacio G. Dupont" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
I'm seeing some unexpected behaviors in our production system relating to
(AFAICS) threads and connection pools, and hope you could bring some info
about them.
Our system is built over 4 PIII Xeon processors under Linux.
We do currently have this configuration:
15 threads for the "default" queue and 10 for an special servlet one, weThat numbers defines number of concurrent requests services
associated with that queues can handle. If monitoring CPU utilization
shows that CPU load is not high, let say less than 90%, - you can increase
that numbers.
decided to separate threads in two queues in order to assure our users get
always a thread besides what the rest of the system is "doing".
Even we do not have a lot of users (about 20 or so) they do generate a lot
of load as for the bussiness logic inherent to the application.>
For sample, so you can understand what goes with practically any user
"action", think on this.[eaten]
We end at last with a lot of concurrent processes in our system that ends
some time with the users complaining about system responsiveness.You will have to run a load test in your QA environment and play with queue
sizes. In addition, you may want to run a profiler (like JProbe or
OptimizeIt)
for maximum load to find if there are bottlenecks in the application.
After all this explanation I would like to know if 25 threads for
"background" and on-line processes is too low (as I'm afraid they are).The
It all depends of the usage pattern. I'd say that for a production
environment
with any noticeable load, it's low.
problem is we can't seem to increase the number of threads without being
very careful with JDBC connection pools.Yes, you will have to increase size of the pools to match maximum
number of ongoing transactions. Minimum would be a number of execution
threads. Actual number should be determined either by load testing or
by setting it to a guaranteed high level.
Currently we have two connection pools. We do demarcate transactions inthe
clients (servlets, batch processes) we have a "transacted" pool and a "non
transacted" one.
We are delegating persistence to the contanier (formally in our case weare
using TopLink persistence and it uses in it's deployment descriptor both
types of pools)
Our configuration is as follows:
Oracle pool NON Tx 60 connections
Oracle pool Tx 30 connections
initially we create 5 connections for each pool with an increment of 5 for
each one too.
From the tests I have made I have discovered that setting more threadsthan
the minimum amount of pools yields to this exception:That's quite natural.
weblogic.common.ResourceException: No available connections in pool
myNonTxPool[eaten]
the behaviour I would expect is that in case a thread needs a connectionand
there isn't any one available the thread may be blocked and it wouldreceive
That would lock exec threads very quickly. A connection pool is a vital
resource that is to be available constantly. So weblogic uses fail-fast
approach so that you can adjust setting to match highest load.
the connecion once one is released, of course as I can see in the stackthe
ConnectionPool.reserveNoWait() method is behaving just the other way.>
The main problem with this is that as you can see we are "forced" to spend
90 (60+30) connections to the DB (even we will never use more than 25
(15+10) simultaneously just because we must assure that at least there is
one "reserved" connection to each thread.That's right.
Our DBA thinks that it can't be possible that we spend such number of
connections that could be taken by another application(s) (as the DB is
shared with other apps)I don't think it's a correct observation. Oracle can be configured to handle
more connections. I saw weblogic pools configured to handle 200
connections.
Currently our DB system is not set as "multithreaded" so each connection
created against the DB is a process on the system and of course they are a
scarce resource.Application demand for resources should be satisfied.
My question is. What would be a "fine" number of threads for anapplication
like this that is mainly "background-batch processing" but assuringon-line
users have their threads always available?It should be high enough to satisfy requirement to handle given number
of concurrent requests processed on given hardware. Normally this
is determined by load testing and gradual increase of this number
to the point where you see that hardware (seen as CPU load)
cannot handle it. Buy the way this point sometimes is unreachable
as application becomes DB-bound, i.e. bottleneck is shifted to
the database.
I have just another doubt (maybe this is not the right thread to ask forit
but...) how does the UserTransaction actually works? I mean, is the
connection given to the thread (and thus extracted from pool) as soon asthe
thread begin it's work? or is it given in the instant of "committing" tothe
It's given when a connection, assuming it's obtained from TxDatasource,
is requested.
DB. I know maybe using TopLink changes default Weblogic CMP behavior but I
would like to know what the "default" Weblogic behavior is; and, what
happens when you don't start a transaction in the client and totalexecution
time exceeds 30 seconds? I have seen a rollback due to "exceeding" those30
seconds although I'm sure we do not open any transaction, what kind of
"transaction" is that? Is just a way of Weblogic to assure a thread is notFor instance, stateful session beans are transactional.
"locked" more than a certain period of time so the system never "stalls"?Basically, no, it's not. There is no way to "unlock" thread after certain
period.
So when a queue has finished processing, TX monitor checks the timeout,
and if there is one, issues a corresponding rollback. So, it's possible
for thread to run for 10 hours if the timeout is 30 seconds.
Since 7.0 weblogic is capable of detecting such situations so that
administrator can be informed about it and required actions can be
taken [on application side].
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Slava Imeshev

Are servlets thread safe??

Are servlets thread safe?? if not, then how to make them thread safe.

Hi,
servlets aren't thread-safe; you can make them thread-safe by implementing the interface javax.servlet.SingleThreadModel
From the javadoc:
public interface SingleThreadModel
Ensures that servlets handle only one request at a time. This interface has no methods.
If a servlet implements this interface, you are guaranteed that no two threads will execute concurrently in the servlet's service method. The servlet container can make this guarantee by synchronizing access to a single instance of the servlet, or by maintaining a pool of servlet instances and dispatching each new request to a free servlet.
If a servlet implements this interface, the servlet will be thread safe. However, this interface does not prevent synchronization problems that result from servlets accessing shared resources such as static class variables or classes outside the scope of the servlet.

Can I give a certain JSP its own thread pool?

Hey all,
          The application I'm working on needs to give a certain JSP its own thread pool so that it does not effect the performance of the other pools. I can create the new thread pool and am trying to set the value in web.xml. Here's my entry:
          <servlet>
          <servlet-name>??????</servlet-name>
          <jsp-file>/search/*.jsp</jsp-file>
          <init-param>
               <param-name>wl-dispatch-policy</param-name>
          <param-value>search</param-value>
          </init-param>
          </servlet>
          Since this is just a JSP can you tell me what I should set the <servlet-name> to?
          Thanks for the help.

you could also try it here:
http://web.mac.com/madmax019/0/mx/Favicons%20%26%20URL%20Icons.html
max

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

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.

About the thread pool

I want to use the thread pool to manage the concurrency in Servlet. Who have some examples about it?And would u pls send it to me?thank u.
My mail is [email protected]

may i know ur requirement ?
u can make servlet method as synchronise so only one client can access that method at a time, this is the simple way...
let me know ur requirement
i hope that i can help u .....
Any more clarifications needed, please inform me.
[email protected]

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

A good design for a single thread pool manager using java.util.concurrent

Hi,
I am developing a client side project which in distinct subparts will execute some tasks in parallel.
So, just to be logorroic, something like that:
program\
            \--flow A\
                       \task A1
                       \task A2
            \--flow B\
                        \task B1
                        \task B2
                        \...I would like both flow A and flow B (and all their launched sub tasks) to be executed by the same thread pool, because I want to set a fixed amount of threads that my program can globally run.
My idea would be something like:
public class ThreadPoolManager {
    private static ExecutorService executor;
    private static final Object classLock = ThreadPoolManager.class;
     * Returns the single instance of the ExecutorService by means of
     * lazy-initialization
     * @return the single instance of ThreadPoolManager
    public static ExecutorService getExecutorService() {
        synchronized (classLock) {
            if (executor != null) {
                return executor;
            } else {
                // TODO: put the dimension of the FixedThreadPool in a property
                executor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(50);
            return executor;
     * Private constructor: deny creating a new object
    private ThreadPoolManager() {
}The tasks I have to execute will be of type Callable, since I expect some results, so you see an ExecutorService interface above.
The flaws with this design is that I don't prevent the use (for example) of executor.shutdownNow(), which would cause problems.
The alternative solution I have in mind would be something like having ThreadPoolManager to be a Singleton which implements ExecutorService, implementing all the methods with Delegation to an ExecutorService object created when the ThreadPoolManager object is instantiated for the first time and returned to client:
public class ThreadPoolManager implements ExecutorService {
    private static ThreadPoolManager pool;
    private static final Object classLock = ThreadPoolManager.class;
    private ExecutorService executor;
     * Returns the single instance of the ThreadPoolManager by means of
     * lazy-initialization
     * @return the single instance of ThreadPoolManager
    public static ExecutorService getThreadPoolManager() {
        synchronized (classLock) {
            if (pool !=null) {
                return pool;
            } else {
                // create the real thread pool
                // TODO: put the dimension of the FixedThreadPool in a property
                // file
                pool = new ThreadPoolManager();
                pool.executor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(50);
                // executor = Executors.newCachedThreadPool();
                return pool;
     * Private constructor: deny creating a new object
    private ThreadPoolManager() {
    /* ======================================== */
    /* implement ExecutorService interface methods via delegation to executor
     * (forbidden method calls, like shutdownNow() , will be "ignored")
      // .....I hope to have expressed all the things, and hope to receive an answer that clarifies my doubts or gives me an hint for an alternative solution or an already made solution.
ciao
Alessio

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.

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

Servlet thread pool

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for