I really don't know. Let me clarify the issue. Specifically, this is what I'm seeing. On SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_OPEN TcpipServerChannel.doInit(Buffer) will call org.apache.sshd.common.io.IoServiceFactory.createConnector(). In the MinaServiceFactory implementation of createConnector() and createAcceptor() it will internally create a org.apache.mina.core.service.IoConnector or org.apache.mina.core.service.IoAcceptor but it does not pass in an executor so org.apache.mina.core.service.AbstractIoAcceptor will create a new executor.
The net effect of this is that with each SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_OPEN on TcpipServerChannel two thread pools are created. If you use Client.startRemotePortForwarding() and then repeatedly connect to the remote socket you will end up with a lot of thread pools. To work around this issue I created my own SSHD IoServiceFactory to pass in the Executor [1] [2] [3]. I believe this is working fine, but I'm now having a different issue with leaking sockets which I'll address on a different thread. Darren [1] https://github.com/ibuildthecloud/dstack/blob/wip-b/code/implementation/agent-connection-ssh/src/main/java/io/github/ibuildthecloud/agent/connection/ssh/connection/SharedExecutorMinaServiceServiceFactory.java [2] https://github.com/ibuildthecloud/dstack/blob/wip-b/code/implementation/agent-connection-ssh/src/main/java/io/github/ibuildthecloud/agent/connection/ssh/connection/SharedExecutorMinaAcceptor.java [3] https://github.com/ibuildthecloud/dstack/blob/wip-b/code/implementation/agent-connection-ssh/src/main/java/io/github/ibuildthecloud/agent/connection/ssh/connection/SharedExecutorMinaAcceptor.java On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 12:43 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny <elecha...@apache.org>wrote: > Are you using an executor in your filter chain ? > Le 30 janv. 2014 22:18, "Darren Shepherd" <darren.s.sheph...@gmail.com> a > écrit : > > > I'm trying to use remote port forwarding. What I'm noticing is that > > for each TCP connection made to the remote port a new > > Nio2Connector/MinaConnector is created which creates a new thread > > pool. I end with hundreds of threads by just connecting to a single > > port every second. Is there anyway to share a thread pool? > > > > Anybody else seeing this behaviour? > > > > Darren > > >
