Re: 2.1 changes - how to proceed (Problems with CVS from 0106 + bette Wouter fix)

[George I Matkovits <ma...@uswest.net>]

While waiting for the new commits (fixes to the commits) I tried your small test
on Linux (RH6.2 with Java 2V1.3, Tomcat 6.21B). I am able to make Soap fail
with:
'SOAP-ENV: Server service '' unknown' error
when running with over 4 instances of your test directly to Port:8080 of Tomcat,
after around 200 OK requests. IMHO this is NOT the 'socket problem' but
something from the distant past which we never stressed.
An SSL connection (via Apache) will almost always fail over 5K requests with the
same error, even with a single client!
We have some REAL problems in the guts of the system under 'stress' loads.
I am going to get the new, better CVS now!

p.s. SSL connections run quite a bit slower then normal ones (after the
connection is made and just reconnecting again). Why?


Yaron Zakai wrote:

> George & Wouter,
>
>  During the last weekend I ran a bunch of massive tests, with the latest CVS
> tree. I succeeded in reproducing the problem very rarely - it took 4-5
> parallel sessions, and 100000 iterations to reproduce the problem. I'm sure
> it exists, but it is very hard to reproduce, not to mention debugging.
>
>  What would you suggest to do for the next step?
>
>  Wouter - have you changed the way you are using the sockets in the last
> round of changes which is not checked into the CVS?
>
> Regards, Yaron.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: George I Matkovits [mailto:matkovitsg@uswest.net]
> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 4:12 AM
> To: soap-dev@xml.apache.org
> Subject: Re: 2.1 changes - how to proceed
>
> Darn. (-: I was under the impression that you committed your changes on
> Saturday night.) I got the CVS tree, added your 'better' fix and run
> Yaron's  3 parallel * 10000 tests = 30000 test cycles OK. At least we know
> that your 'connection' fix works perfectly :-) Could we get a parallel CVS
> tree built somewhere?
> Regards - George
>
> Wouter Cloetens wrote:
>
> > I've gotten very far this weekend. The changes are massive. I've
> > touched over half the source files...
> >
> > I'm a bit reluctant to commit this stuff before it's properly tested.
> > Especially, I'm not familiar with XMI, use of the envelope filter (I
> > propose that as a new name for "transport hook extension" as it doesn't
> > really work at the transport layer since the introduction of MIME
> > functionality), the fault listener functionality, any of the scripting
> > stuff and the SMTP transport. I don't have the setup to test EJBs
> > anymore.
> >
> > Would you guys propose that I commit the changes, risk breaking some
> > functionality or introducing bugs in the latest CVS, but fix those as
> > people test and report problems, or should I make my in-progress tree
> > available elsewhere and wait until it's stable to commit?
> >
> > bfn, Wouter
> > --
> > http://www.workspot.net/~zombie/soap/
> > My opinions are irrelevant. They will be assimilated by my employer.