Setting max bean pool size in MDB

Hi,
I need to set the max bean pool size for my MDB to 1. This MDB is a part of my application and is packaged in an ear.
I tried to set it with the following annotation -
import javax.ejb.*;
@MessageDriven
(mappedName = "MyQueue",
name = "MyMDB",
activationConfig = {
@ActivationConfigProperty(propertyName="maxBeansInFreePool",
propertyValue="1"),
@ActivationConfigProperty(propertyName="initialBeansInFreePool",
propertyValue="1"),
@ActivationConfigProperty(propertyName = "destinationType", propertyValue = "javax.jms.Queue")
However, this does not seem to work since I see the Current pool count on the WLS console as 3 after processing is done.
After looking at various posts in this forum, I also tried it with weblogic ejbgen as follows-
import weblogic.ejbgen.*;
@MessageDriven(ejbName = "MyMDB",
destinationType = "javax.jms.Queue",
initialBeansInFreePool = "1",
maxBeansInFreePool = "1",
destinationJndiName = "MyQueue")
However, with this the MDB did not get deployed in WLS.
I am using Weblogic 10.3 / EJB 3.0.
Any help on this is greatly appreciated.
Thanks
Meera

As far as I know, it currently isn't possible to set max-beans-in-free-pool via annotations. You can use a deployment plan (configurable from console and/or follow the link supplied by atheek1).
I think you can also automatically generate descriptors based on javadoc text via ejb-gen, I'm not quite sure if this tooling can work in conjunction with EJB 3.0 annotations. See http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E12840_01/wls/docs103/ejb/EJBGen_reference.html
Tom

Similar Messages

Set maximum session bean pool size?

Using the embedded OC4J, how can I set the maximum pool size for my session beans? I am using Jdeveloper 10g. Do I have to manually edit some XML file?

Set the system property com.sun.jndi.ldap.connect.pool.maxsize
System.setProperty("com.sun.jndi.ldap.connect.pool.maxsize", "25");

Guidelines for setting Application Module Pool Size Parameters?

Are there guidelines for setting the application module pool size parameters, such as initial pool size, maximum pool size, etc., based on the expected number of users or other factors? I've read the developer guide sections (ch 28-29), but still don't have a good feel for how to correctly set the optimal values for the pool configuration parameters? Even more importanty, how do I monitor the pool's efficiency during runtime to determine if the pooling parameters are configured correctly?
This will be critical to performance and scalability, so I'm looking for a way to get some visibility into how the pooling is working during production operation to assess whether there are bottlenecks/constraints/ineffeciencies?
Note I am using Tomcat as the java runtime container; ADF BC / JSF jdev 10.1.3.1
Thanks in advance and Merry Christmas!

KUBA - were you able to resolve these issues and if so are there any lessons learned you can share?
I'm hoping someone from the ADF team can answer our original question including guidelines for setting pool parameters and how to monitor the pool's performance while running in production.
thanks

Dynmically setting max bean count?

Hi,
With the applications we deploy we want to insure that the bean
pool and thread pool are inited at their maximum value. The only
thing is that depending on what machine we deploy the maximum
would not be the same, due to memory or processor constraints.
Currently we have to define these values manually. Is there any
way for us to write a plug-in to automatically set these values
based on an algorithm?
regards
Andre

Hello,
I think you can write a script that uses weblogic.Admin utility to automate this process after deploying your beans.
I can't remember if you can control the specific ejb properties you require, have a look at:
http://edocs.bea.com/wls/docs81/admin_ref/cli.html

Unable to set max log file size to unlimited

Hi all,
Hoping someone can give me an explanation of an oddity I've had. I have a series of fairly large databases. I wanted the make the database log files 8GB in size with 8GB growth increments with
unlimited maximum file size. So, I wrote the script below. It seems to have worked but the database max size doesn't show as unlimited, it shows as 2,097,152MB and cannot be set to unlimited using a script or in SSMS by clicking on the unlimited radio button.
2TB is effectively unlimited anyway but why show that rather than actually setting it to unlimited?
USE
[master]
GO
--- Note: this only works for SIMPLE RECOVERY MODE. FOR FULL / BULK RECOVERY modes you need to backup the transaction log instead of a CHECKPOINT.
DECLARE
@debug
varchar(1)
SET @debug =
'Y'
DECLARE
@database
varchar(255)
DECLARE
@logicalname
varchar(255)
DECLARE
@command
varchar(8000)
DECLARE
database_cursor
CURSOR LOCAL
FAST_FORWARD FOR
select
DB_NAME(database_id)
as DatabaseName
name
as LogicalName
from
master.sys.master_files
where
file_id
= 2
AND type_desc
= 'LOG'
AND physical_name
LIKE '%_log.ldf'
AND
DB_NAME(database_id)
NOT IN('master','model','msdb','tempdb')
OPEN
database_cursor
FETCH
NEXT FROM database_cursor
into @database,@logicalname
WHILE
@@FETCH_STATUS
= 0
BEGIN
SET
@command
= '
USE ['
+ @database
+ ']
CHECKPOINT
DBCC SHRINKFILE('''
+ @logicalname
+ ''', TRUNCATEONLY)
IF
(@debug='Y')
BEGIN
PRINT
@command
END
exec
(@command)
SET
@command
= '
USE master
ALTER DATABASE ['
+ @database
+ ']
MODIFY FILE
( NAME = '''
+ @logicalname
+ '''
, SIZE = 8000MB
ALTER DATABASE ['
+ @database
+ ']
MODIFY FILE
( NAME = '''
+ @logicalname
+ '''
, MAXSIZE = UNLIMITED
, FILEGROWTH = 8000MB
IF
(@debug='Y')
BEGIN
PRINT
@command
END
exec
(@command)
FETCH
NEXT FROM database_cursor
INTO @database,@logicalname
END
CLOSE
database_cursor
DEALLOCATE
database_cursor

Hi,
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
File size (data)
16 terabytes
16 terabytes
File size (log)
2 terabytes
2 terabytes
Thanks, Andrew
My blog...

To limit the number of beans pooled in entity-cache

here are the issues in the problem.
1. would like to make sure there are NO More than N beans in the entity cache.
2. if I set max-beans-in-free-pool, problem seems to be this: if I need to retrieve more than (N+1) rows from DB, weblogic retrieves ONLY N beans because it reached the max-beans-in-free-pool. That behaviour is not desirable, of course.
so, how does one set the entity-cache params, to
1. retrieve as many entity beans as required - regardless of the param max-beans-in-free-pool
2. let weblogic grow the entity cache to as big a cache as required - but then shrink it back to "some specified" cache size after idle-timeout. whats the param for that?
any help in understanding these issues would be great.

HI,
You can make use of feature to maintain maximum and minimum limits per condition type.
SPRO > SAP Implementation Guide > Customer Relationship Management > Basic Functions > Pricing > Define Settings for Pricing > Create Minimum/Maximum Limits
In this activity you can restrict manual processing of pricing conditions in transactions using minimum and maximum limits per condition type.
Kindly reward with points in case helpful
Sharif

Entity Bean Pool

Weblogic(6.1) deployment descriptor allows configuration of entity bean pool size
and cache size. Since calls from multiple clients to the same entity bean are
serialized what is the benefit of having multiple instances in an entity bean
pool?
Thanks,
Stefan

Anand,
Of course I don't talk about an extreme case of a table with one row!?, but the
same (logical) entity bean with same primary key accessed by multiple clients.
Each client will use findByPrimaryKey method and will get a reference to same
entity bean mapped to the same "row" in database . My surprise was that even for
this case there are multiple entity instances created in the pool for one row
in the database. For multiple instances mapped to multiple rows we concluded all
makes sense.
thanks again,
Stefan
"Anand Byrappagari" <[email protected]> wrote:
Stefan,
I am not sure I understand your question but if you are asking why
have
pooling, pool of instances is a feature for all types of entity beans.
In
the specific case that you have where the table has only one row it has
limited application but the general case is that you lave multiple rows
in a
table. For example, an Address table will in all probability have hundereds
of addresses of customers. An application accessing this table will be
accessing multiple address instances at any given time. So each of this
instances should be accessable independently hence the pool makes sense
in
this case. I point I am trying to make is that when you define a pool
for a
bean (AddressBean) you are not defining the pool for one instance of
the
bean type(like address_1). The pool specifies the number of instances
(address_1, address_2, ...., address_n) that can exist at any given time.
Are you asking if the pool size is for each row? That is if pool
size is
set to 10, are you asking if you can have atmost 10 instances of address_1
as opposed to 10 instances of any address? The pool and cache sizes refer
to
the limit on any instances and not on 1 instance.
Even in the extreme case like the one you mention where the table
has
only one row, there is some utility in having multiple instances as this
would not require serializing access to the bean - in exclusive strategy,
once a client has locked an EJB instance, other clients are blocked from
the
EJB's data even if they intend only to read the persistent fields. If
you
set the strategy to database then multiple instances can access the data
depending on the isolation levels you have set. Read Chapter 4 of
"Programming Weblogic Enterprise JavaBeans" for more information.
Hope this helps.
-- Anand
"Stefan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Anand,
If we established that same databse row can be mapped to multiple entitybeans
instances we are back to my original question: Assuming "database"concurrency
strategy, how do you see this model useful if calls from multiple clientsare
serialized across all these instances? I cannot point out the benefitof
the pool
of entity bean instances for same row since they all wait for a clientcall to
finish before replying to another client. Where is the benefit of havingmultiple
instances if one instance would do the same job?
thanks,
Stefan
"Anand Byrappagari" <[email protected]> wrote:
The default concurrency-strategy in weblogic 6.1 is database which
means
that concurrency is taken care of at the database, this model allows
you to
have multiple ejb object instances for the same row in the database.
If you
want a single instance then you can set <concurrency-strategy> element
in
the deployment descriptor for the ejb to Exclusive.
-- Anand
"Stefan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Thanks Anand,
Sure this way it makes total sense. However I used an example whereI was
referencing
only one row from multiple clients. For this case using the WeblogicConsole I
saw the number of bean instances growing. This would indicate thatsame
row is
mapped to multiple bean instances in the pool, which prompted my
question.
Stefan
"Anand Byrappagari" <[email protected]> wrote:
Think of entity beans as mapping to a row in a database. Access
to
a
single
row is synchronized not to all the rows. So it still makes sense
to
have
multiple instances possibly mapping to multiple rows in the database.
-- Anand
"stefan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Weblogic(6.1) deployment descriptor allows configuration of entitybean
pool size
and cache size. Since calls from multiple clients to the same
entity
bean
are
serialized what is the benefit of having multiple instances in
an
entity
bean
pool?
Thanks,
Stefan

Programatic determination of realtime statless session bean pool characteristics

Is there any way to determine the pool characteristics for a specific
stateless session bean, i.e. number of free beans etc...
We have an application that needs to ensure that the number of free
beans in the pool never exceeds a certain limit.

Kareem Kouddous wrote:
Is there any way to determine the pool characteristics for a specific
stateless session bean, i.e. number of free beans etc...In WLS 6.1, this is available through JMX
>
We have an application that needs to ensure that the number of free
beans in the pool never exceeds a certain limit.Set max-beans-in-free-pool to that limit (works in >= 5.1). There was a
bug in 6.1 that's fixed in 6.1SP2.
-- Rob

Important conceptual question about Application Module, Maximum Pool Size

Hello everyone,
We have a critical question about the Application Module default settings (taking the DB connections from a DataSource)
I know that on the Web it is generally suggested that each request must end with either a commit or rollback when executing PL/SQL blocks "directly" on the DB without the framework BC/ViewObject/Entity service intervention.
Now, for some reasons, we started to develop our applications with thinking that each Web Session would reference exactly one DB session (opened by any instance taken from the AM pool) for the whole duration of the session, so that the changes made by each Web session to its DB session would never interfere with the changes made by "other" Web Sessions to "other" DB sessions .
In other words, because of that convincement we often implemented sort of "transactions" that open and close (with either commit or rollback) each DB session not in/after a single HTTP request, but during many HTTP Requests.
As a concrete example think of this scenario:
1. the user presses the "Insert" button. An HTTP request is fired. The action listener is executed and ends up with inserting rows in a table via a PL SQL block (not via the ViewObjects API).
2. no commit or rollback after the above PL/SQL block is done yet.
3. finally the user presses a "Commit" or "Rollback" button, firing the call to the appropriate AM methos.
Those three requests consist of what I called "transaction".
From the documentation it's clear that there is no guarantee that the couple AM istance + DB session is the same during all the requests.
This means that, during step 2, it's possible that another user might reference the same "pending" AM/DbSession for his needs and "steal" somehow the work done via PL/SQL after step 1. (This happens because sessions taken by the pool are always rolled back by default.)
Now my question is:
Suppose we set the "Maximum Pool Size" parameter to very a great number (always inferior to the maximum number of concurrent users):
Is there any guarantee that all the requests will be isolated in that case?
I hope the problem is clear.
Let me know if you want more details.

Thanks for the answers.
If I am right, from all your answers about resource avaiability, this means that even supposing the framework is able to always give us the same AM instance back from the AM pool (by following the session-affinity criterias), there is, however, no "connection affinity" with the connections from the DataSource. This means that the "same AM instance" might take the "a new DB connection", if necessary, from the connection pool of the DataSource. If that happens, that could give us the same problems as taking "a new AM instance" (that is, not following session-affinity) from the beginning, since each time an a new connection is taken (either via a new AM instance or via the same AM instance plus a new DB connection), the corresponding DB session is rolle back by default, clearing all the pending transactions we might have performed before with direct PL/SQL calls bypassing the AM services during the life cycle of our application, so that the new HTTP request will have a clean DB session to start to work with.

Buffer pool size

Oracle 9.2.0.4.0
java 1.4.2
Hi,
How can I set the buffer pool size in oracle 9i?
Thanks
JN

DB_CACHE_SIZE
Parameter type
Big integer
Syntax
DB_CACHE_SIZE = integer [K | M | G]
Default value
48 MB, rounded up to the nearest granule size
Parameter class
Dynamic: ALTER SYSTEM
DB_CACHE_SIZE specifies the size of the DEFAULT buffer pool for buffers with the primary block size (the block size defined by the DB_BLOCK_SIZE parameter).
The value must be at least the size of one granule (smaller values are automatically rounded up to the granule size). A value of zero is illegal because zero is the size of the DEFAULT pool for the standard block size, which is the block size for the SYSTEM tablespace.
[email protected]
Joel P�rez

ORA-04031 on 10g - should I just adjust my SGA POOL SIZE?

Has anyone gotten this message frequently:
ORA-04031: unable to allocate 37536 bytes of shared memory ("shared pool","unknown object","sga heap(1,0)","session parame")
We are a business intelligence application that issues lots of large queries. We just migrated to 10g and we are seeing this every 2-3 days on our testing machine.
In particular, I am not sure about "sga heap"... I would just set my Shared Pool Size higher - currently 144 MB but will this help here? Thoughts?

In Oracle 10g a new feature called "automatic memory management" allows the dba to reserve a pool of shared memory that is used to allocate the shared pool, the buffer cache, the java pool and the large pool.
In general, when the database needs to allocate a large object into the shared pool and cannot find contiguous space available, it will automatically increase the shared pool size using free space from other SGA structure.
Since the space allocation is automatically managed by Oracle, the probability of getting ora-4031 errors may be greatly reduced. Automatic Memory Management is enabled when the parameter SGA_TARGET is greater than zero and the current setting can be obtained quering the v$sga_dynamic_components view.
Please refer to the 10g Administration Manual for further reference
http://download-west.oracle.com/docs/cd/B19306_01/server.102/b14231/toc.htm

Max-beans-in-cache, cachefullexception, outofmemory error

Hi,
I am trying to find the best way to find the numbers to be set in max-beans-in-cache
for entity beans. I have a stateless session bean through which I access the
entity beans. If I don't set any value for this property, in some query which
will return 2500 records, I get a cachefullexception and if I increase it and
set this property to say 5000, I get an outofmemory error.
I am not sure how to decide what value should be used.
Any help or suggestion would be greatly appreciated.
We are using WLS 7.0 on NT machines in a cluster.
Thanks,
Jaideep

If you need to perform some sort of bulk processing then perhaps you
shouldn't be using
entity beans at all.
"Jaideep" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]..
>
unfortunately, for a specific functionality in our application we need toget that
many records. Now I am debating about changing the finder method so thatit returns
only 500 records at one time and then I can call it multiple number oftimes.
This may not be the best thing to do and we may take some kind of aperformance
hit also but it may avoid the cachefull and outofmemory problems.
Any suggestions or comments??
Thanks,
Jaideep
Rob Woollen <[email protected]> wrote:
First off, does what does the session bean or its caller do with the
2500 or 5000 records? i.e. do you really need to select that many.
Unfortunately there is no easy answer on how to set max-beans-in-cache.
It depends a lot on your memory, application, and load.
-- Rob
Jaideep wrote:
Hi,
I am trying to find the best way to find the numbers to be set in
max-beans-in-cache
for entity beans. I have a stateless session bean through which Iaccess the
entity beans. If I don't set any value for this property, in somequery which
will return 2500 records, I get a cachefullexception and if I increaseit and
set this property to say 5000, I get an outofmemory error.
I am not sure how to decide what value should be used.
Any help or suggestion would be greatly appreciated.
We are using WLS 7.0 on NT machines in a cluster.
Thanks,
Jaideep
Dimitri

Min Pool Size Option?

Hi Guys
We have having problems with connection pools remaining in a production environment.
We have of course checked to make sure that all objects are closed and disposed and all connections close correctly in our dev and test environments.
In most cases each user only every opens one connect to the database from a ASP.NET application running in IIS 6.0 (.Net Framework 1.1) using Oracle Data Access Components 10.2.0.2.20. These connections appears to remain for days and in the case where multiple connections they appear to slowly close and again leave the single remaining connection open for days.
Any ideas do we need to set the Min Pool Size to Zero?
How long should it take to close connections that are not in use?
Sample code...
Private Sub btODPConnect_Click(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles btODPConnect.Click
Dim strConn As String
Dim mConn As New Oracle.DataAccess.Client.OracleConnection
strConn = "Password=" & txtPassword.Text & ";User ID=" & txtUsername.Text & ";Data Source=" & txtDatabase.Text & ";Min Pool Size=0;"
mConn = New Oracle.DataAccess.Client.OracleConnection(strConn)
mConn.Open()
If mConn.State = ConnectionState.Open Then
ASPNET_MsgBox("Connection Open!")
End If
mConn.Close()
mConn.Dispose()
mConn = Nothing
End Sub
Thanks in advance P

What problem are you trying to solve at this point? Simply "why is odp not tracing?" The only suggestions I really have there are
1) make sure you restart the app after enabling tracing parameters
2) make sure the directory you've set tracing to is open as far as permissions
3) make sure you've set tracing in the right registry setting if you have multiple versions of ODP installed
4) if you're trying to write to c:\ root, try creating and pointing to a different (c:\odptrace for example) directory instead.
Hope it helps,
Greg

Mdb ejb won't load using steady-pool-size

I have a message driven bean I'm deploying in an .ear file. The sun-ejb-jar.xml file has the following:
<sun-ejb-jar>
<enterprise-beans>
<unique-id>1</unique-id>
<ejb>
<ejb-name>LoggerEJB</ejb-name>
<jndi-name>com.ecc.utils.LoggerTopic</jndi-name>
<mdb-connection-factory>
<jndi-name>com.ecc.utils.JMSTopicConnectionFactory</jndi-name>
</mdb-connection-factory>
<bean-pool>
<steady-pool-size>2</steady-pool-size>
<resize-quantity>1</resize-quantity>
<max-pool-size>5</max-pool-size>
<pool-idle-timeout-in-seconds>600</pool-idle-timeout-in-seconds>
</bean-pool>
</ejb>
</enterprise-beans>
</sun-ejb-jar>
Yet I see no evidence it is pre-loading my mdb ejbs. I have output statements and logging that would indicated an instance has actually loaded, and I am seeing none of it. So, what magic trick does it take to get the mdb to acutally use it's <steady-pool-size> setting in the descriptor file?
Also, how can you tell what ejbs and how many instances are loaded? I see nothing in the Console for this. Also, how can you monitor a topic/queue to see if anything is getting sent?
Tony F

Does the ext directory have the php_oci8.dll? In the original steps the PHP dir is renamed. In the given php.in the extension_dir looks like it has been updated correctly. Since PHP distributes php_oci8.dll by default I reckon there would be a very good chance that the problem was somewhere else. Since this is an old thread I don't think we'll get much value from speculation.
-- cj

Setting Thread pool size

          Hi,
          I want to know if I set a system property "-Dweblogic.ThreadPoolSize", how will the
          WLS get to know that the pool size has been changed, at run time?
          E.g. I pass -Dweblogic.ThreadPoolSize=30 from the command-line. Then if I change
          the pool size to 40 at runtime, is there any event that I can fire for the change
          in property through APIs?
          Thnx in advance.
          Best Regards
          Ali


Disregarding what it is for, in my experience, tuning this setting rarely has much effect. For 6.1, the main thread pool related tunables to look at are the EJB thread pools and EJB max-beans... settings, the "default" thread pool, and the internal thread-pool for stand-alone clients -- all of which are mentioned in the performance guide.

Setting max bean pool size in MDB

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for