You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> on 2008/02/09 10:22:45 UTC
Connector problems
Working with Tomasz Mazan we discovered that there was a permit leak
in the connector pooling code (GERONIMO-3834). While fixing this I
revamped quite a bit of the pooling code and added several permit
count and resizing tests, hopefully making it more reliable and
reducing the bug count.
I think we should get this bug fix in g. 2.1 which will require
releasing the "components" jars also. I'm OK with a vote on the
component jars + geronimo 2.1.
We might consider releasing 2.0.3 with this fix as well.
thanks
david jencks
Re: Connector problems
Posted by Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org>.
Sounds like a good fix to go into the 2.0.3 stream, too.
-Donald
Kevan Miller wrote:
>
> On Feb 9, 2008, at 4:35 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
>> I thought that I knew JCA pretty well. What is a permit leak?
>
> It's not an external JCA concept, but an internal implementation
> mechanism. A "permit" is an acquired semaphore used to grant permission
> to obtain a connection. In some exceptional cases, looks like we weren't
> properly releasing the "permit". If you lose enough permits, you stop
> handing out connections. So, things slow down a bit... ;-) There might
> have been another problem adjusting pool size, but I'm not sure. A bit
> hard to tease out from some code re-factoring occurred...
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alan
>>
>> On Feb 9, 2008, at 1:22 AM, David Jencks wrote:
>>
>>> Working with Tomasz Mazan we discovered that there was a permit leak
>>> in the connector pooling code (GERONIMO-3834). While fixing this I
>>> revamped quite a bit of the pooling code and added several permit
>>> count and resizing tests, hopefully making it more reliable and
>>> reducing the bug count.
>>>
>>> I think we should get this bug fix in g. 2.1 which will require
>>> releasing the "components" jars also. I'm OK with a vote on the
>>> component jars + geronimo 2.1.
>
> Agreed. I'll start pulling things together...
>
>>>
>>>
>>> We might consider releasing 2.0.3 with this fix as well.
>
> Possible. What do others think?
>
> --kevan
>
Re: Connector problems
Posted by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>.
On Feb 9, 2008, at 4:35 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> I thought that I knew JCA pretty well. What is a permit leak?
It's not an external JCA concept, but an internal implementation
mechanism. A "permit" is an acquired semaphore used to grant
permission to obtain a connection. In some exceptional cases, looks
like we weren't properly releasing the "permit". If you lose enough
permits, you stop handing out connections. So, things slow down a
bit... ;-) There might have been another problem adjusting pool size,
but I'm not sure. A bit hard to tease out from some code re-factoring
occurred...
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
> On Feb 9, 2008, at 1:22 AM, David Jencks wrote:
>
>> Working with Tomasz Mazan we discovered that there was a permit
>> leak in the connector pooling code (GERONIMO-3834). While fixing
>> this I revamped quite a bit of the pooling code and added several
>> permit count and resizing tests, hopefully making it more reliable
>> and reducing the bug count.
>>
>> I think we should get this bug fix in g. 2.1 which will require
>> releasing the "components" jars also. I'm OK with a vote on the
>> component jars + geronimo 2.1.
Agreed. I'll start pulling things together...
>>
>>
>> We might consider releasing 2.0.3 with this fix as well.
Possible. What do others think?
--kevan
Re: Connector problems
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
I thought that I knew JCA pretty well. What is a permit leak?
Regards,
Alan
On Feb 9, 2008, at 1:22 AM, David Jencks wrote:
> Working with Tomasz Mazan we discovered that there was a permit leak
> in the connector pooling code (GERONIMO-3834). While fixing this I
> revamped quite a bit of the pooling code and added several permit
> count and resizing tests, hopefully making it more reliable and
> reducing the bug count.
>
> I think we should get this bug fix in g. 2.1 which will require
> releasing the "components" jars also. I'm OK with a vote on the
> component jars + geronimo 2.1.
>
> We might consider releasing 2.0.3 with this fix as well.
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
>