You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@ignite.apache.org by Ryan Ripken <ry...@rmanet.com> on 2017/04/10 23:07:00 UTC
Re: Concurrent job execution and
FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1
The issue seemed weird to me as well. It was not reproducible and so I
just assumed that something must have gone wrong with the installation.
I had this issue occur in January and it just happened again over the
weekend. This was using Ignite 1.5.0.final.
I've verified that all the nodes are configured using
FifoQueueCollisionSpi with parallelJobsNumber = 1.
The nodes which execute the jobs are configured via xml:
... <property name="collisionSpi">
<bean
class="org.apache.ignite.spi.collision.fifoqueue.FifoQueueCollisionSpi">
<property name="parallelJobsNumber" value="1"/>
</bean>
</property> ...
Based on your previous response I believe the collisionSPI on the node
submitting the task does not matter. Just in case that node also has
the SPI configured:
IgniteConfiguration igniteConfig = new IgniteConfiguration();
igniteConfig.setMarshaller(new OptimizedMarshaller());
igniteConfig.setMetricsLogFrequency(3600000);
FifoQueueCollisionSpi colSpi = new FifoQueueCollisionSpi();
colSpi.setParallelJobsNumber(1);
igniteConfig.setCollisionSpi(colSpi);
...
On the previous occurrence of this bug I added this code to the job
execution:
CollisionSpi collisionSpi = grid.configuration().getCollisionSpi();
if (collisionSpi instanceof FifoQueueCollisionSpi) {
FifoQueueCollisionSpi fifo = (FifoQueueCollisionSpi)
collisionSpi;
int parallelJobsNumber = fifo.getParallelJobsNumber();
_logger.info("FifoQueueCollisionSpi used with
parallelJobsNumber:" + parallelJobsNumber);
} else {
_logger.info("CollisionSpi is not FifoQueueCollisionSpi
but:" + collisionSpi.getClass().getSimpleName());
}
And in the logs I see:
FifoQueueCollisionSpi used with parallelJobsNumber:1
However I also see three jobs starting on the same node. The jobs can
take minutes to hours to complete and unfortunately the jobs have to
interact with a gui application. When multiple jobs are executed at the
same time there are race conditions related to which workspace the gui
application has open. Also during the job execution the gui application
computes some values. If multiple computes are done at the same time
the results get mixed up.
Are there known issues with FifoQueueCollisionSpi? Are there any
workarounds?
I'm considering adding an atomicinteger counter check in the job
execution code. Do you have any suggestions? I was thinking that if I
had failover setup it should be safe to fail any jobs that attempt to
start concurrently.
Lastly, thanks for the hard work on Ignite (and GridGain!).
-Ryan
On 11/7/2016 6:04 PM, vkulichenko wrote:
> Collision SPI is called on the node that executes the job. Having said that,
> what you tell sounds a bit weird. Are you sure other nodes didn't lose the
> config as well?
>
> -Val
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p8749.html
> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Concurrent job execution and
FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1
Posted by Ryan Ripken <ry...@rmanet.com>.
Okay, thanks for looking into it.
In the meantime I've started using a TaskContinuousMapperResource and
making subgrid.size() jobs available initially and then feeding out an
additional job in each result() call.
It was actually surprisingly easy to change the Task implementation. I
love that the Ignite interfaces are so clean!
The users like that jobs are now being completed in-order.
So far it isn't crashing. Since making the change I've noticed that
several of the compute nodes have become idle for 2-3 hour periods
during the compute. Perhaps I've got an off-by-one error in my job
feeding logic. That part of the code is dead-simple so I don't see how
it could be off but I'm going to add more logging to track down when the
mapper makes each job available vs when each node starts working on the job.
I'd still prefer using the parallelJobsNumber setting.
Thanks again,
Ryan
On 4/13/2017 2:18 AM, vkulichenko wrote:
> Hi Ryan,
>
> I will take a look at your sample in the next few days.
>
> -Val
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p11935.html
> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Concurrent job execution and
FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1
Posted by Ryan Ripken <ry...@rmanet.com>.
Please let me know if I can help in any way.
On 4/13/2017 2:18 AM, vkulichenko wrote:
> Hi Ryan,
>
> I will take a look at your sample in the next few days.
>
> -Val
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p11935.html
> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Concurrent job execution and
FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1
Posted by vkulichenko <va...@gmail.com>.
Hi Ryan,
I will take a look at your sample in the next few days.
-Val
--
View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p11935.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Concurrent job execution and
FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1
Posted by vkulichenko <va...@gmail.com>.
Hi Ryan,
Yes, I think. But note that will create a high contention on this method -
each job request will acquire the same lock. Although, it's probably not an
issue in your case as you do not allow to execute more than one job at a
time anyway.
-Val
--
View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p14282.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Concurrent job execution and
FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1
Posted by Ryan Ripken <ry...@rmanet.com>.
I use IgniteMessaging to update status info from inside my compute jobs
so publicThreadPoolSize=1 probably isn't going to work.
In your opinion, would a new CollisionSpi implementation that
synchronized the onCollision method resolve the issue?
On 6/9/2017 5:01 PM, vkulichenko wrote:
> Ryan,
>
> Yes, this is about IgniteMessaging API.
>
> -Val
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p13586.html
> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Concurrent job execution and
FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1
Posted by vkulichenko <va...@gmail.com>.
Ryan,
Yes, this is about IgniteMessaging API.
-Val
--
View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p13586.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Concurrent job execution and
FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1
Posted by ryan <ry...@rmanet.com>.
Interesting. I'll have to give that a try. The documentation for
PublicThreadPoolSize explains that the executor service will be in
charge of processing GridJobs and user messages set to the node.
What are examples of user messages? Would that include usages of
IgniteMessaging such as the following?
IgnitePredicate<ClusterNode> nodeForNodeId =
GridFunc.nodeForNodeId(taskNodeId);
IgniteMessaging rmtMsg =
grid.message(grid.cluster().forPredicate(nodeForNodeId));
rmtMsg.send(FrmComputeTask.LOGGING_TOPIC, msg2);
On 6/9/2017 2:22 PM, vkulichenko wrote:
> Ryan,
>
> I added a comment in the ticket. I would recommend you to set the size of
> public thread pool to 1 (IgniteConfiguration#publicThreadPoolSize) to make
> sure that jobs are not executed in parallel.
>
> -Val
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p13581.html
> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Concurrent job execution and
FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1
Posted by vkulichenko <va...@gmail.com>.
Ryan,
I added a comment in the ticket. I would recommend you to set the size of
public thread pool to 1 (IgniteConfiguration#publicThreadPoolSize) to make
sure that jobs are not executed in parallel.
-Val
--
View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p13581.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Concurrent job execution and
FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1
Posted by vkulichenko <va...@gmail.com>.
Hi Ryan,
I will take a look this week.
-Val
--
View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p13440.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Concurrent job execution and
FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1
Posted by Ryan Ripken <ry...@rmanet.com>.
Has anyone gotten a chance to look at issue IGNITE-5183 ?
I had an (I think) unrelated compute failure today and was reminded that
I'm still using my own hacked together work-around.
FifoQueueCollisionSpi only has a handful of config options and
parallelJobsNumber is the only one that is demo'd in the documentation.
The documentation states: "Execute all jobs sequentially by setting
parallel job number to 1." I believe my example shows that the
implementation has a bug and that jobs are not always executed
sequentially.
Is this the wrong place for bug reports? Should I raise this issue on
the dev list?
On 5/12/2017 9:06 AM, ryan wrote:
>
> I used the previously provided example and duplicated the issue in the
> Ignite 2.0 release on Windows 10
>
> I also created an issue: IGNITE-5183
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5183>
>
>
> On 4/12/2017 2:15 PM, Ryan Ripken wrote:
>> I tried the below example with Ignite 1.9 and I continue to see
>> multiple jobs being executed at the same time on nodes that are
>> configured with FifoQueueCollisionSpi and parallelJobsNumber:1
>>
>> Am I misunderstanding the purpose of the parallelJobsNumber setting?
>>
>> thanks,
>> Ryan
>>
>>
>> On 4/11/2017 5:25 PM, Ryan Ripken wrote:
>>> Ignite Team -
>>>
>>> I created a stripped down version of what I'm trying to do:
>>>
>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/zhxidn14cgi4dqg/IgniteTest.7z?dl=0
>>>
>>> There are a couple variables in node.bat that will need to be edited
>>> to point at your java_home and to the path where the 7z is unzipped to.
>>>
>>> I first start a generic node by running node.bat from the command line.
>>>
>>> Then I run the IgniteTest main method from my IDE.
>>>
>>> The needed jar files are included in a jar directory. They are what
>>> I believe are the typical 1.5 Ignite jars.
>>>
>>> Running it I see this output:
>>>
>>> Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger
>>> warning
>>> WARNING: Peer class loading is enabled (disable it in production
>>> for performance and deployment consistency reasons)
>>> Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger
>>> warning
>>> WARNING: This operating system has been tested less rigorously:
>>> Windows 10 10.0 amd64. Our team will appreciate the feedback if
>>> you experience any problems running ignite in this environment.
>>> Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger
>>> warning
>>> WARNING: Checkpoints are disabled (to enable configure any
>>> GridCheckpointSpi implementation)
>>> Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger
>>> warning
>>> WARNING: Swap space is disabled. To enable use FileSwapSpaceSpi.
>>> SLF4J: Class path contains multiple SLF4J bindings.
>>> SLF4J: Found binding in
>>> [jar:file:/J:/ignite/modules/rest-http/target/libs/slf4j-log4j12-1.7.7.jar!/org/slf4j/impl/StaticLoggerBinder.class]
>>> SLF4J: Found binding in
>>> [jar:file:/J:/ignite/modules/visor-plugins/target/libs/slf4j-log4j12-1.7.7.jar!/org/slf4j/impl/StaticLoggerBinder.class]
>>> SLF4J: See http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#multiple_bindings for
>>> an explanation.
>>> SLF4J: Actual binding is of type [org.slf4j.impl.Log4jLoggerFactory]
>>> Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger
>>> warning
>>> WARNING: TcpDiscoveryMulticastIpFinder has no pre-configured
>>> addresses (it is recommended in production to specify at least
>>> one address in TcpDiscoveryMulticastIpFinder.getAddresses()
>>> configuration property)
>>> Apr 11, 2017 5:03:43 PM ignitetest.TestJob execute
>>> WARNING: *******Multiple jobs in progress. NOT GOOD
>>> ************************
>>> *******Multiple jobs in progress. NOT GOOD ************************
>>> Apr 11, 2017 5:03:43 PM ignitetest.TestJob execute
>>> WARNING: *******Multiple jobs in progress. NOT GOOD
>>> ************************
>>> *******Multiple jobs in progress. NOT GOOD ************************
>>>
>>>
>>> In trying to make a self-contained version I seem to have messed up
>>> the logging configuration so not all the log messages are being
>>> displayed.
>>> If its absolutely essential I can work on sorting out the logging
>>> issue and send another version.
>>>
>>> I haven't tried this example in 1.9 yet. Perhaps I will try that
>>> tomorrow.
>>>
>>> I used essentially the same pattern in GridGain 3.6 and didn't have
>>> any problems. Perhaps I messed something up when moving to Ignite.
>>> I'd really appreciate any suggestions.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ryan
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4/11/2017 5:55 AM, vkulichenko wrote:
>>>> Ryan,
>>>>
>>>> No, there are no known issues like that and I don't think there will be a
>>>> way to investigate it without being able to reproduce. Please let us know if
>>>> you have a reproducer.
>>>>
>>>> -Val
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> View this message in context:http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p11884.html
>>>> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Concurrent job execution and
FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1
Posted by ryan <ry...@rmanet.com>.
I used the previously provided example and duplicated the issue in the
Ignite 2.0 release on Windows 10
I also created an issue: IGNITE-5183
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5183>
On 4/12/2017 2:15 PM, Ryan Ripken wrote:
> I tried the below example with Ignite 1.9 and I continue to see
> multiple jobs being executed at the same time on nodes that are
> configured with FifoQueueCollisionSpi and parallelJobsNumber:1
>
> Am I misunderstanding the purpose of the parallelJobsNumber setting?
>
> thanks,
> Ryan
>
>
> On 4/11/2017 5:25 PM, Ryan Ripken wrote:
>> Ignite Team -
>>
>> I created a stripped down version of what I'm trying to do:
>>
>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/zhxidn14cgi4dqg/IgniteTest.7z?dl=0
>>
>> There are a couple variables in node.bat that will need to be edited
>> to point at your java_home and to the path where the 7z is unzipped to.
>>
>> I first start a generic node by running node.bat from the command line.
>>
>> Then I run the IgniteTest main method from my IDE.
>>
>> The needed jar files are included in a jar directory. They are what
>> I believe are the typical 1.5 Ignite jars.
>>
>> Running it I see this output:
>>
>> Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger
>> warning
>> WARNING: Peer class loading is enabled (disable it in production
>> for performance and deployment consistency reasons)
>> Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger
>> warning
>> WARNING: This operating system has been tested less rigorously:
>> Windows 10 10.0 amd64. Our team will appreciate the feedback if
>> you experience any problems running ignite in this environment.
>> Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger
>> warning
>> WARNING: Checkpoints are disabled (to enable configure any
>> GridCheckpointSpi implementation)
>> Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger
>> warning
>> WARNING: Swap space is disabled. To enable use FileSwapSpaceSpi.
>> SLF4J: Class path contains multiple SLF4J bindings.
>> SLF4J: Found binding in
>> [jar:file:/J:/ignite/modules/rest-http/target/libs/slf4j-log4j12-1.7.7.jar!/org/slf4j/impl/StaticLoggerBinder.class]
>> SLF4J: Found binding in
>> [jar:file:/J:/ignite/modules/visor-plugins/target/libs/slf4j-log4j12-1.7.7.jar!/org/slf4j/impl/StaticLoggerBinder.class]
>> SLF4J: See http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#multiple_bindings for
>> an explanation.
>> SLF4J: Actual binding is of type [org.slf4j.impl.Log4jLoggerFactory]
>> Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger
>> warning
>> WARNING: TcpDiscoveryMulticastIpFinder has no pre-configured
>> addresses (it is recommended in production to specify at least
>> one address in TcpDiscoveryMulticastIpFinder.getAddresses()
>> configuration property)
>> Apr 11, 2017 5:03:43 PM ignitetest.TestJob execute
>> WARNING: *******Multiple jobs in progress. NOT GOOD
>> ************************
>> *******Multiple jobs in progress. NOT GOOD ************************
>> Apr 11, 2017 5:03:43 PM ignitetest.TestJob execute
>> WARNING: *******Multiple jobs in progress. NOT GOOD
>> ************************
>> *******Multiple jobs in progress. NOT GOOD ************************
>>
>>
>> In trying to make a self-contained version I seem to have messed up
>> the logging configuration so not all the log messages are being
>> displayed.
>> If its absolutely essential I can work on sorting out the logging
>> issue and send another version.
>>
>> I haven't tried this example in 1.9 yet. Perhaps I will try that
>> tomorrow.
>>
>> I used essentially the same pattern in GridGain 3.6 and didn't have
>> any problems. Perhaps I messed something up when moving to Ignite.
>> I'd really appreciate any suggestions.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ryan
>>
>>
>> On 4/11/2017 5:55 AM, vkulichenko wrote:
>>> Ryan,
>>>
>>> No, there are no known issues like that and I don't think there will be a
>>> way to investigate it without being able to reproduce. Please let us know if
>>> you have a reproducer.
>>>
>>> -Val
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p11884.html
>>> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>
Re: Concurrent job execution and
FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1
Posted by Ryan Ripken <ry...@rmanet.com>.
I tried the below example with Ignite 1.9 and I continue to see multiple
jobs being executed at the same time on nodes that are configured with
FifoQueueCollisionSpi and parallelJobsNumber:1
Am I misunderstanding the purpose of the parallelJobsNumber setting?
thanks,
Ryan
On 4/11/2017 5:25 PM, Ryan Ripken wrote:
> Ignite Team -
>
> I created a stripped down version of what I'm trying to do:
>
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/zhxidn14cgi4dqg/IgniteTest.7z?dl=0
>
> There are a couple variables in node.bat that will need to be edited
> to point at your java_home and to the path where the 7z is unzipped to.
>
> I first start a generic node by running node.bat from the command line.
>
> Then I run the IgniteTest main method from my IDE.
>
> The needed jar files are included in a jar directory. They are what I
> believe are the typical 1.5 Ignite jars.
>
> Running it I see this output:
>
> Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger
> warning
> WARNING: Peer class loading is enabled (disable it in production
> for performance and deployment consistency reasons)
> Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger
> warning
> WARNING: This operating system has been tested less rigorously:
> Windows 10 10.0 amd64. Our team will appreciate the feedback if
> you experience any problems running ignite in this environment.
> Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger
> warning
> WARNING: Checkpoints are disabled (to enable configure any
> GridCheckpointSpi implementation)
> Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger
> warning
> WARNING: Swap space is disabled. To enable use FileSwapSpaceSpi.
> SLF4J: Class path contains multiple SLF4J bindings.
> SLF4J: Found binding in
> [jar:file:/J:/ignite/modules/rest-http/target/libs/slf4j-log4j12-1.7.7.jar!/org/slf4j/impl/StaticLoggerBinder.class]
> SLF4J: Found binding in
> [jar:file:/J:/ignite/modules/visor-plugins/target/libs/slf4j-log4j12-1.7.7.jar!/org/slf4j/impl/StaticLoggerBinder.class]
> SLF4J: See http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#multiple_bindings for
> an explanation.
> SLF4J: Actual binding is of type [org.slf4j.impl.Log4jLoggerFactory]
> Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger
> warning
> WARNING: TcpDiscoveryMulticastIpFinder has no pre-configured
> addresses (it is recommended in production to specify at least one
> address in TcpDiscoveryMulticastIpFinder.getAddresses()
> configuration property)
> Apr 11, 2017 5:03:43 PM ignitetest.TestJob execute
> WARNING: *******Multiple jobs in progress. NOT GOOD
> ************************
> *******Multiple jobs in progress. NOT GOOD ************************
> Apr 11, 2017 5:03:43 PM ignitetest.TestJob execute
> WARNING: *******Multiple jobs in progress. NOT GOOD
> ************************
> *******Multiple jobs in progress. NOT GOOD ************************
>
>
> In trying to make a self-contained version I seem to have messed up
> the logging configuration so not all the log messages are being displayed.
> If its absolutely essential I can work on sorting out the logging
> issue and send another version.
>
> I haven't tried this example in 1.9 yet. Perhaps I will try that
> tomorrow.
>
> I used essentially the same pattern in GridGain 3.6 and didn't have
> any problems. Perhaps I messed something up when moving to Ignite.
> I'd really appreciate any suggestions.
>
> Thanks,
> Ryan
>
>
> On 4/11/2017 5:55 AM, vkulichenko wrote:
>> Ryan,
>>
>> No, there are no known issues like that and I don't think there will be a
>> way to investigate it without being able to reproduce. Please let us know if
>> you have a reproducer.
>>
>> -Val
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p11884.html
>> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
Re: Concurrent job execution and
FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1
Posted by Ryan Ripken <ry...@rmanet.com>.
Ignite Team -
I created a stripped down version of what I'm trying to do:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zhxidn14cgi4dqg/IgniteTest.7z?dl=0
There are a couple variables in node.bat that will need to be edited to
point at your java_home and to the path where the 7z is unzipped to.
I first start a generic node by running node.bat from the command line.
Then I run the IgniteTest main method from my IDE.
The needed jar files are included in a jar directory. They are what I
believe are the typical 1.5 Ignite jars.
Running it I see this output:
Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger warning
WARNING: Peer class loading is enabled (disable it in production for
performance and deployment consistency reasons)
Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger warning
WARNING: This operating system has been tested less rigorously:
Windows 10 10.0 amd64. Our team will appreciate the feedback if you
experience any problems running ignite in this environment.
Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger warning
WARNING: Checkpoints are disabled (to enable configure any
GridCheckpointSpi implementation)
Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger warning
WARNING: Swap space is disabled. To enable use FileSwapSpaceSpi.
SLF4J: Class path contains multiple SLF4J bindings.
SLF4J: Found binding in
[jar:file:/J:/ignite/modules/rest-http/target/libs/slf4j-log4j12-1.7.7.jar!/org/slf4j/impl/StaticLoggerBinder.class]
SLF4J: Found binding in
[jar:file:/J:/ignite/modules/visor-plugins/target/libs/slf4j-log4j12-1.7.7.jar!/org/slf4j/impl/StaticLoggerBinder.class]
SLF4J: See http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#multiple_bindings for an
explanation.
SLF4J: Actual binding is of type [org.slf4j.impl.Log4jLoggerFactory]
Apr 11, 2017 5:02:48 PM org.apache.ignite.logger.java.JavaLogger warning
WARNING: TcpDiscoveryMulticastIpFinder has no pre-configured
addresses (it is recommended in production to specify at least one
address in TcpDiscoveryMulticastIpFinder.getAddresses()
configuration property)
Apr 11, 2017 5:03:43 PM ignitetest.TestJob execute
WARNING: *******Multiple jobs in progress. NOT GOOD
************************
*******Multiple jobs in progress. NOT GOOD ************************
Apr 11, 2017 5:03:43 PM ignitetest.TestJob execute
WARNING: *******Multiple jobs in progress. NOT GOOD
************************
*******Multiple jobs in progress. NOT GOOD ************************
In trying to make a self-contained version I seem to have messed up the
logging configuration so not all the log messages are being displayed.
If its absolutely essential I can work on sorting out the logging issue
and send another version.
I haven't tried this example in 1.9 yet. Perhaps I will try that tomorrow.
I used essentially the same pattern in GridGain 3.6 and didn't have any
problems. Perhaps I messed something up when moving to Ignite. I'd
really appreciate any suggestions.
Thanks,
Ryan
On 4/11/2017 5:55 AM, vkulichenko wrote:
> Ryan,
>
> No, there are no known issues like that and I don't think there will be a
> way to investigate it without being able to reproduce. Please let us know if
> you have a reproducer.
>
> -Val
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p11884.html
> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Concurrent job execution and
FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1
Posted by vkulichenko <va...@gmail.com>.
Ryan,
No, there are no known issues like that and I don't think there will be a
way to investigate it without being able to reproduce. Please let us know if
you have a reproducer.
-Val
--
View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p11884.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.