[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HTTPCORE-155?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12659137#action_12659137
 ] 

Sam Berlin commented on HTTPCORE-155:
-------------------------------------

The issue stems from the fact the documentation of SelectionKey states that it 
is OK for a naive implementation of a SelectionKey read or write to block 
indefinitely if a selection operation is already in progress.  The issue is not 
so much with the fact that an implementation blocks -- it has more to do with 
the fact that it can block if a selection is in progress.

This documentation is counter to the most typical (and easiest) use of a 
SelectionKey.  The average NIO program allows users to change the interestOps 
on any thread, and after changing the ops, wakes up the selector.  On the Sun 
JVM this is allowed and works quite perfectly -- the ops change, the selector 
wakes up, the selector loops again and selects on the new interestOps.

In my opinion, the documentation on SelectionKey that is is OK to block while a 
selection is in progress should be removed.  It makes implementing a 
high-performance NIO program much more difficult to architect properly.

If the code were to workaround the fact that this blocking is acceptable and 
"normal" behavior, the code would need to change such that code requesting a 
change in interestOps must:

 1) Locally replicate the desired interestOps (including all prior interestOps 
changes).
 2) Wakeup the Selector
 3) The selector thread must retrieve the desire interestOps from each local 
replication and set the new interestOps on the actual SelectionKey.
 4) Perform the select.

In effect, this requires a duplication of SelectionKey's job.  Each 
SelectionKey must have associated with it the newly desired ops that can only 
actually be set by the selector after it wakes up.

> Performance issues with IBM JRE 6.0
> -----------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HTTPCORE-155
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HTTPCORE-155
>             Project: HttpComponents HttpCore
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: HttpCore NIO
>    Affects Versions: 4.0-beta1
>         Environment: Windows 2003 SP2 - IBM J2RE 1.6.0 build 2.4 - HTTPCore 
> Beta1 - Dual Core CPU 3.0Ghz - 1Gbps networking
>            Reporter: Tom McSorley
>             Fix For: 4.1
>
>         Attachments: AbstractIOReactor.diff, AbstractIOReactor.java, 
> IOSessionImpl.diff, IOSessionImpl.java, 
> javacore.20081203.153723.32300.0001.txt, patch.08-12-17.tar.gz, 
> patch.08-12-18.tar.gz, patch.08-12-22.tar.gz
>
>
> I'm issuing a second HTTP Request on a connection that has very recently 
> returned a null for the submitRequest() call...  this 2nd request is being 
> issued approximately 500ms after the submitRequest() null is returned... so 
> the connection has just been established, an HTTP Request/Response-200 cycle 
> has completed just prior to this 2nd request being issued.  I'm seeing 
> unusually long delays in the requestOutput() call (verified by surrounding 
> timing prints)... that can range anywhere from a few milliseconds on up to 60 
> seconds...  It eventually unwinds, and then the submitRequest() is called... 
> this 2nd request is dispatched and works fine... but, it is delayed 
> considerably...  Is this a known issue and is there a possible work-around?
> Here's the JVM related thread information:
> The thread being delayed and stuck in the requestOutput() call for a long 
> time (mostly longer than 5 seconds):
> 3XMTHREADINFO      "pool-2-thread-5" TID:0x2AEECE00, j9thread_t:0x2A7189A8, 
> state:B, prio=5
> 3XMTHREADINFO1            (native thread ID:0x1B44, native priority:0x5, 
> native policy:UNKNOWN)
> 4XESTACKTRACE          at 
> sun/nio/ch/SelectionKeyImpl.interestOps(SelectionKeyImpl.java:60)
> 4XESTACKTRACE          at 
> org/apache/http/impl/nio/reactor/IOSessionImpl.setEvent(IOSessionImpl.java:113)
> 4XESTACKTRACE          at 
> org/apache/http/impl/nio/NHttpConnectionBase.requestOutput(NHttpConnectionBase.java:158)
> .... (non important stack information removed)
> 4XESTACKTRACE          at 
> java/util/concurrent/ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:919)
> 4XESTACKTRACE          at java/lang/Thread.run(Thread.java:735)
> Here's the monitor that this thread is blocked and waiting on:
> 2LKMONINUSE      sys_mon_t:0x2A708AF8 infl_mon_t: 0x2A708B30:
> 3LKMONOBJECT       sun/nio/ch/uti...@00b09208/00B09214: Flat locked by "I/O 
> dispatcher 7" (0x2A208E00), entry count 1
> 3LKWAITERQ            Waiting to enter:
> 3LKWAITER                "pool-2-thread-5" (0x2AEECE00)
> And here's the thread that currently has this monitor locked:
> 3XMTHREADINFO      "I/O dispatcher 7" TID:0x2A208E00, j9thread_t:0x2A6EC73C, 
> state:R, prio=5
> 3XMTHREADINFO1            (native thread ID:0x830, native priority:0x5, 
> native policy:UNKNOWN)
> 4XESTACKTRACE          at 
> sun/nio/ch/WindowsSelectorImpl$SubSelector.poll0(Native Method)
> 4XESTACKTRACE          at 
> sun/nio/ch/WindowsSelectorImpl$SubSelector.poll(WindowsSelectorImpl.java:308(Compiled
>  Code))
> 4XESTACKTRACE          at 
> sun/nio/ch/WindowsSelectorImpl$SubSelector.access$500(WindowsSelectorImpl.java(Compiled
>  Code))
> 4XESTACKTRACE          at 
> sun/nio/ch/WindowsSelectorImpl.doSelect(WindowsSelectorImpl.java:162(Compiled 
> Code))
> 4XESTACKTRACE          at 
> sun/nio/ch/SelectorImpl.lockAndDoSelect(SelectorImpl.java:69(Compiled Code))
> 4XESTACKTRACE          at 
> sun/nio/ch/SelectorImpl.select(SelectorImpl.java:80(Compiled Code))
> 4XESTACKTRACE          at 
> org/apache/http/impl/nio/reactor/AbstractIOReactor.execute(AbstractIOReactor.java:121)
> 4XESTACKTRACE          at 
> org/apache/http/impl/nio/reactor/BaseIOReactor.execute(BaseIOReactor.java:70)
> 4XESTACKTRACE          at 
> org/apache/http/impl/nio/reactor/AbstractMultiworkerIOReactor$Worker.run(AbstractMultiworkerIOReactor.java:318)
> 4XESTACKTRACE          at java/lang/Thread.run(Thread.java:735)
> I should also note that we're attempting to use 1000 client instances on this 
> single system... each with potentially 2 active connections simultaneously... 
> there is also virtually no CPU load (i.e. less then 5%) on this system...

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to