[Bug 60319] New: Executor limits reported via JMX can be inconsistent

[bu...@apache.org]

https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60319

            Bug ID: 60319
           Summary: Executor limits reported via JMX can be inconsistent
           Product: Tomcat 9
           Version: 9.0.0.M11
          Hardware: All
                OS: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Connectors
          Assignee: dev@tomcat.apache.org
          Reporter: markt@apache.org

When a connector is configured with an external executor JMX allows the min/max
threads to be set either directly via the executor or via the
connector/protocol/endpoint. If set via the connector/protocol/endpoint the
reported current settings can be inconsistent.

I'm not convinced that allowing the executor settings to be set via the
connector/protocol/endpoint was a good idea. I'm currently considering changing
the implementation along the following lines:
- calls to setters only change settings for internal exectuor
- if an external executor is configured, getters always return '-1' or similar

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org

[Bug 60319] Executor limits reported via JMX can be inconsistent

[bu...@apache.org]

https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60319

--- Comment #3 from Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> ---
I've committed a fix to trunk. The code isn't much simpler but the behaviour
should be simpler for users to follow. Back-ports to follow shortly.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org

[Bug 60319] Executor limits reported via JMX can be inconsistent

[bu...@apache.org]

https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60319

Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #4 from Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> ---
Fixed in trunk for 9.0.0.M12 onwards, 8.5.x for 8.5.7 onwards, 8.0.x for 8.0.39
onwards and 7.0.x for 7.0.73 onwards.

Not back-ported to 6.0.x since the lack of refactoring to AbstractEndpoint
makes it a lot more work, 6.0.x is close to EOL and this is a minor issue.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org

[Bug 60319] Executor limits reported via JMX can be inconsistent

[bu...@apache.org]

https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60319

--- Comment #1 from Christopher Schultz <ch...@christopherschultz.net> ---
I might even throw an exception.

For TC9, I think we can even remove these getters/setters on the <Connector>
itself, unless the consensus is that configuration-convenience trumps
simplicity (of the code).

If we opt for continued support for min/max settings directly on the
<Connector> only for an internal connector, I would vote for throwing an
exception (IllegalStateException?) when using an external <Executor> and
calling an associated internal-executor-only method.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org

[Bug 60319] Executor limits reported via JMX can be inconsistent

[bu...@apache.org]

https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60319

--- Comment #2 from Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> ---
The problem with the exception approach is that we don't necessarily know that
an external executor is going to be configured at the point the setters are
called.

I agree that simpler is good. I want to look at this some more today with that
in mind.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org