Just got the following note from peter. He been getting busy with some JBossMQ stress tests, and he commented, "... JBossMQ now seems to be verry stable. It handles recovery fine, don't leek threads, has the ability to dump dangling connections, can handle largs ammounts of data, is failsafe."
Just wanted to say thanks to everybody that has helped solidify JBossMQ. Regards, Hiram >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: JBossMQ and MessageCache >Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 22:42:53 +0100 (CET) > >On 18 Feb, Hiram Chirino wrote: > > > > Hey I just ran the test case and it completed without errors or >failures. I > > run on winXP and Sun jdk 1.3.1_02 > > > > > >Hi, strange. Do you have twin CPU:s? > >I have been putting together a series of stresstest, and was doing one >test to emulate the bugs I discovered in the message cache. And guess >what, I could not even get the cache to start working, until I >implemented a non responding consumer. Fact is, this bug (which is still >in there somewhere) was the one that made the buggs in the MessageCache >surface. > >The stress test is rather funny to run, since it starts and stops jboss >from within ant and with the help of "parellell" I can tes all sort of >restarts and disaperance of the server, for example the >ExceptionListener. Verry handy, altough the tests seems to take >forever... > >My basic impression is that JBossMQ nov seems to be verry stable. It >handles recovery fine, don't leek threads, has the ability to dump >dangling connections, can handle largs ammounts of data, is failsafe. > >You and the others have really done a great jobb. > >What I would like to do however is change the >autentication/authorization logic. I would like to integrate it with the >one in JBoss, so that different user backends could be used for user >data, such as ldap. > >In that vain I think it would be good to implement acl:s for >destinations, based on roles. An acl should be rwx, where x should be >that you are allowed to create durable subscriptions on the fly. To make >that possible, we would have to allow for these users to set their own >clientId. > >You have any input on this? Do you like the idea, or do you know of any >pitfalls? > >//Peter > > > > regards, > > Hiram > > > >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Subject: Re: JBossMQ and MessageCache > >>Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 21:55:15 +0100 (CET) > >> > >>Hi, thank for your answer. I have fixed the MessageCache, and verifyed > >>that it works with at least 100 000 of messages with a low memory bar > >>(120M). The performance degrades havily, but it at least keep shurnung > >>away messages. > >> > >>But it also seems there is a bug that has with async topics handling to > >>do. In the perf test the async topic stops receiving messages after a > >>while. > >> > >>Pleas, could you test with for example a setting like this, and see if > >>its the same for you: > >> > >>sh build.sh -Djunit.jvm.options=-Xmx256m -Djunit.timeout=2400000 > >>-Djbosstest.iterationcount=1000 > >>-Dtest=org.jboss.test.jbossmq.perf.JBossMQPerfStressTestCase one-test > >> > >> > >>//Peter > >>On 13 Feb, Hiram Chirino wrote: > >> >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> >>Subject: JBossMQ and MessageCache > >> >>Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 23:26:51 +0100 (CET) > >> >> > >> >>Hi Hiram, > >> >>I will (if all works well here) have a couple of weeks when I plan to > >> >>stress- and stability test JBossMQ. > >> >> > >> > > >> > Awsome! > >> > > >> >>I almost emediately run into a couple of problems. > >> >> > >> >>1. MessageCache. > >> >> > >> >>When tuning down the high marks and sending lots of messages it >started > >> >>its work, only to fail imediately. I tracked some bugs down in the >lru > >> >>cache, and it now seems to do its jobb. But one thing I don't get. >Why > >> >>do it hold on to all the messages, even when they are sent and done > >> >>with. > >> >> > >> >>Should I excpect the MessageCache to be working or should I expect it >to > >> >>have non tuned behaviour. > >> >> > >> > > >> > Well, last time I played with it (a few months ago) it seemed to be > >>working > >> > well. I think that David M. added the custom lru stuff to make it > >>faster. I > >> > have not tested since. The message cache should be letting go of > >>messages > >> > as they are removed from the message queues. > >> > > >> >>2. Persistent message to Topic. > >> >> > >> >>When sending persistent messages to a topic I can't see any activity >to > >> >>persist them to disk. Will this mean that if JBoss(MQ) crach before > >> >>beeing able to deliver them to active subscribes that the messages is > >> >>lost? > >> >> > >> > > >> > That is true. Per spec the only way to avoid message loss on a topic >is > >>to > >> > have a durable subscription. If there is a durable subscription on >that > >> > topic then you should see disk activity as the messages are being > >>persisted. > >> > If you do not see this, then there is a bug. > >> > > >> >>3. I am using a subset of the perf test, but when I put on >transaction > >> >> for the asynch topic (that which was commented away), rount 50 > >> >> messages are acked, but then the message listener stops receiving > >> >> anyting. Have you expercienced any thread problems in the >transact > >> >> handling? > >> >> > >> > > >> > Last time I tested it with the perf test was a LONG time ago and it >ran > >>fine > >> > at some point. Some serious debuging will need to take place to find > >>out > >> > whats going on. > >> > > >> >>My plan is to verrify (and fix any problems I find) that JBossMQ is >rock > >> >>solid when it commes to handling message persistence, durable > >> >>subscribers, hanging or lost client connections and high message >sending > >> >>activity. I also plan to backport it if I can reach a good level of > >> > > >> > That would be awsome. If you will be adding test to the testsuite to > >> > accomplish your goal, I'll try to commit some time to help you squash > >>the > >> > bugs that your tests turn up. > >> > > >> >>stability. So I hope to be quite active the next comming weeks. > >> >> > >> >>//Peter > >> > > >> > Thanks Peter, > >> > JBossMQ has been needing someone to put forth this effort. > >> > > >> > Regards, > >> > Hiram > >> > > >> >>-- > >> >>------------------------------------------------------------ > >> >>Peter Antman Technology in Media, Box 34105 100 26 >Stockholm > >> >>Systems Architect WWW: http://www.tim.se > >> >>Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.backsource.org > >> >>Phone: +46-(0)8-506 381 11 Mobile: 070-675 3942 > >> >>------------------------------------------------------------ > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > _________________________________________________________________ > >> > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > >>http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. > >> > >>-- > >>------------------------------------------------------------ > >>Peter Antman Technology in Media, Box 34105 100 26 Stockholm > >>Systems Architect WWW: http://www.tim.se > >>Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.backsource.org > >>Phone: +46-(0)8-506 381 11 Mobile: 070-675 3942 > >>------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at >http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. > >-- >------------------------------------------------------------ >Peter Antman Technology in Media, Box 34105 100 26 Stockholm >Systems Architect WWW: http://www.tim.se >Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.backsource.org >Phone: +46-(0)8-506 381 11 Mobile: 070-675 3942 >------------------------------------------------------------ > _________________________________________________________________ Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
