You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to server-user@james.apache.org by Timothy Prepscius <ti...@gmail.com> on 2012/06/19 14:58:39 UTC
overhead of JmxServerProbe?
I am wondering whether anyone knows the overhead associated with the JmxServerProbe?
So, currently, I instantiate a JMX interface and keep it around indefinitely in order to create users.
However, it eventually times out and fails to reconnect.
Thereafter, user creation fails.
So, if I use JMX, I will need to change the code to instantiate the JMX interface with each user creation.
---
Is this wise? What sort of overhead am I inducing by creating this JMX interface?
I'm wondering if I should instead just write directly to the james.JAMES_USER table.
--
Thanks,
-tim
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
Re: overhead of JmxServerProbe?
Posted by Eric Charles <er...@apache.org>.
Sounds logic.
If you ever see a timeout exception, just paste in a JIRA.
Thx, Eric
On 06/21/2012 06:57 PM, Timothy Prepscius wrote:
> And just to be overly explicit about what I'm seeing, exception stack trace:
>
> If I start the guy with jmx connection, create a user, then kill james, then start james, then create a user, I see this exception:
>
> java.rmi.ConnectException: Connection refused to host: 127.0.1.1; nested exception is:
> java.net.ConnectException: Connection refused
> at sun.rmi.transport.tcp.TCPEndpoint.newSocket(TCPEndpoint.java:619)
> at sun.rmi.transport.tcp.TCPChannel.createConnection(TCPChannel.java:216)
> at sun.rmi.transport.tcp.TCPChannel.newConnection(TCPChannel.java:202)
> at sun.rmi.server.UnicastRef.invoke(UnicastRef.java:128)
> at com.sun.jmx.remote.internal.PRef.invoke(Unknown Source)
> at javax.management.remote.rmi.RMIConnectionImpl_Stub.invoke(Unknown Source)
> at javax.management.remote.rmi.RMIConnector$RemoteMBeanServerConnection.invoke(RMIConnector.java:1017)
> at javax.management.MBeanServerInvocationHandler.invoke(MBeanServerInvocationHandler.java:305)
> at $Proxy0.addUser(Unknown Source)
> at org.apache.james.cli.probe.impl.JmxServerProbe.addUser(JmxServerProbe.java:116)
>
> if I then restart the guy who is jmx-ing all functions correctly again.
>
> -tim
>
> On Jun 21, 2012, at 12:44 PM, Timothy Prepscius wrote:
>
>> 1. I remember the initial exception incorrectly, and that I never got a timeout. I could have just gotten a connection problem, and I mentally inserted the word timeout.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
--
eric | http://about.echarles.net | @echarles
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
Re: overhead of JmxServerProbe?
Posted by Timothy Prepscius <ti...@gmail.com>.
And just to be overly explicit about what I'm seeing, exception stack trace:
If I start the guy with jmx connection, create a user, then kill james, then start james, then create a user, I see this exception:
java.rmi.ConnectException: Connection refused to host: 127.0.1.1; nested exception is:
java.net.ConnectException: Connection refused
at sun.rmi.transport.tcp.TCPEndpoint.newSocket(TCPEndpoint.java:619)
at sun.rmi.transport.tcp.TCPChannel.createConnection(TCPChannel.java:216)
at sun.rmi.transport.tcp.TCPChannel.newConnection(TCPChannel.java:202)
at sun.rmi.server.UnicastRef.invoke(UnicastRef.java:128)
at com.sun.jmx.remote.internal.PRef.invoke(Unknown Source)
at javax.management.remote.rmi.RMIConnectionImpl_Stub.invoke(Unknown Source)
at javax.management.remote.rmi.RMIConnector$RemoteMBeanServerConnection.invoke(RMIConnector.java:1017)
at javax.management.MBeanServerInvocationHandler.invoke(MBeanServerInvocationHandler.java:305)
at $Proxy0.addUser(Unknown Source)
at org.apache.james.cli.probe.impl.JmxServerProbe.addUser(JmxServerProbe.java:116)
if I then restart the guy who is jmx-ing all functions correctly again.
-tim
On Jun 21, 2012, at 12:44 PM, Timothy Prepscius wrote:
> 1. I remember the initial exception incorrectly, and that I never got a timeout. I could have just gotten a connection problem, and I mentally inserted the word timeout.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
Re: overhead of JmxServerProbe?
Posted by Timothy Prepscius <ti...@gmail.com>.
Yes, that was strange.
Ok. I have not been able to get the timeout error again.
I believe yesterday when I tested with the james server restart, I may have restarted user-adder.
I can't other wise explain why it worked.
Today I created a user. (which worked without timeout after 12 hours).
I immediately killed james and restarted it 10 seconds later. (sockets)
Attempted to create another user and got a jmx exception.
So. At this point I believe my e-mail from yesterday gave incorrect information.
--
At this point, I would guess that:
1. I remember the initial exception incorrectly, and that I never got a timeout. I could have just gotten a connection problem, and I mentally inserted the word timeout.
2. If there was in fact a timeout, perhaps I had killed the James server, and somehow, as the connection timed out, and tried to reconnect it caught this exception and attributed it to timeout, where in fact it was a missing James Server, or a restarted name server.
Anyhow. If I ever see the timeout again I will save the log!
-tim
On Jun 21, 2012, at 1:39 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
> On 06/20/2012 10:30 PM, Timothy Prepscius wrote:
>> I don't know yet. Hasn't timed out again yet.
>> I hope it is not indeterminate.
>>
>> I just tried to create a user, and it succeeded. And it has been 8 hours since this morning. When I created a user.
>> Hmmm, I wonder what will happen if I restart the james server.
>>
>> Ok, that succeeded too.
>>
>
> Strange. I would have bet on a broken connection.
> Eric
>
>>
>> Hmm.. I don't know. I should have kept that log.
>> Will let you know the next time it happens,
>>
>> -tim
>>
>>
>> On Jun 20, 2012, at 5:08 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Tim,
>>>
>>> An indication of the time needed to get the timeout will be useful.
>>>
>>> We already have findbugs defines in the (project) pom, so if you invoke 'mvn findbugs:check' you will get a findbugs.xml in the target folder. If you want something more readable, you can invoke 'mvn site -Psite-reports' (look in site/findbugs.html).
>>>
>>> Thx, Eric
>>>
>>> On 06/19/2012 06:48 PM, Timothy Prepscius wrote:
>>>> K, I'll post a stack trace tomorrow. (need to wait for the connection to die)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [ optional ]
>>>>
>>>> On a lesser note, do you guys do code coverage/static analysis of james?
>>>>
>>>> Do you have a favorite tool/plugin that works well with maven and james?
>>>> (I'm not versed in the various maven java coverage/analysis tools)
>>>>
>>>> I'll spend some time looking tonight, but if there is an obvious choice.. etc etc etc..
>>>>
>>>> [ /optional ]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -tim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jun 19, 2012, at 10:23 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Tim,
>>>>>
>>>>> No idea on the overhead, the connect method instanciates a few objects connecting to the remote server.
>>>>>
>>>>> If your workload is not too high, it should be all right, but don't do it via direct database access (never ever!).
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be good that you post the exception stacktrace in a JIRA so we can think to enhance the client with a JMX Connection pool (or something like that) or configure the connection with longer timeouts.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thx,
>>>>> Eric
>>>>>
>>>>> On 06/19/2012 02:58 PM, Timothy Prepscius wrote:
>>>>>> I am wondering whether anyone knows the overhead associated with the JmxServerProbe?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, currently, I instantiate a JMX interface and keep it around indefinitely in order to create users.
>>>>>> However, it eventually times out and fails to reconnect.
>>>>>> Thereafter, user creation fails.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, if I use JMX, I will need to change the code to instantiate the JMX interface with each user creation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is this wise? What sort of overhead am I inducing by creating this JMX interface?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm wondering if I should instead just write directly to the james.JAMES_USER table.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -tim
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> eric | http://about.echarles.net | @echarles
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> eric | http://about.echarles.net | @echarles
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>>
>
> --
> eric | http://about.echarles.net | @echarles
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
Re: overhead of JmxServerProbe?
Posted by Eric Charles <er...@apache.org>.
On 06/20/2012 10:30 PM, Timothy Prepscius wrote:
> I don't know yet. Hasn't timed out again yet.
> I hope it is not indeterminate.
>
> I just tried to create a user, and it succeeded. And it has been 8 hours since this morning. When I created a user.
> Hmmm, I wonder what will happen if I restart the james server.
>
> Ok, that succeeded too.
>
Strange. I would have bet on a broken connection.
Eric
>
> Hmm.. I don't know. I should have kept that log.
> Will let you know the next time it happens,
>
> -tim
>
>
> On Jun 20, 2012, at 5:08 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
>
>> Hi Tim,
>>
>> An indication of the time needed to get the timeout will be useful.
>>
>> We already have findbugs defines in the (project) pom, so if you invoke 'mvn findbugs:check' you will get a findbugs.xml in the target folder. If you want something more readable, you can invoke 'mvn site -Psite-reports' (look in site/findbugs.html).
>>
>> Thx, Eric
>>
>> On 06/19/2012 06:48 PM, Timothy Prepscius wrote:
>>> K, I'll post a stack trace tomorrow. (need to wait for the connection to die)
>>>
>>>
>>> [ optional ]
>>>
>>> On a lesser note, do you guys do code coverage/static analysis of james?
>>>
>>> Do you have a favorite tool/plugin that works well with maven and james?
>>> (I'm not versed in the various maven java coverage/analysis tools)
>>>
>>> I'll spend some time looking tonight, but if there is an obvious choice.. etc etc etc..
>>>
>>> [ /optional ]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>> -tim
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 19, 2012, at 10:23 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Tim,
>>>>
>>>> No idea on the overhead, the connect method instanciates a few objects connecting to the remote server.
>>>>
>>>> If your workload is not too high, it should be all right, but don't do it via direct database access (never ever!).
>>>>
>>>> It would be good that you post the exception stacktrace in a JIRA so we can think to enhance the client with a JMX Connection pool (or something like that) or configure the connection with longer timeouts.
>>>>
>>>> Thx,
>>>> Eric
>>>>
>>>> On 06/19/2012 02:58 PM, Timothy Prepscius wrote:
>>>>> I am wondering whether anyone knows the overhead associated with the JmxServerProbe?
>>>>>
>>>>> So, currently, I instantiate a JMX interface and keep it around indefinitely in order to create users.
>>>>> However, it eventually times out and fails to reconnect.
>>>>> Thereafter, user creation fails.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So, if I use JMX, I will need to change the code to instantiate the JMX interface with each user creation.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this wise? What sort of overhead am I inducing by creating this JMX interface?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm wondering if I should instead just write directly to the james.JAMES_USER table.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> -tim
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> eric | http://about.echarles.net | @echarles
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>>>
>>
>> --
>> eric | http://about.echarles.net | @echarles
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
--
eric | http://about.echarles.net | @echarles
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
Re: overhead of JmxServerProbe?
Posted by Timothy Prepscius <ti...@gmail.com>.
I don't know yet. Hasn't timed out again yet.
I hope it is not indeterminate.
I just tried to create a user, and it succeeded. And it has been 8 hours since this morning. When I created a user.
Hmmm, I wonder what will happen if I restart the james server.
Ok, that succeeded too.
Hmm.. I don't know. I should have kept that log.
Will let you know the next time it happens,
-tim
On Jun 20, 2012, at 5:08 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
> Hi Tim,
>
> An indication of the time needed to get the timeout will be useful.
>
> We already have findbugs defines in the (project) pom, so if you invoke 'mvn findbugs:check' you will get a findbugs.xml in the target folder. If you want something more readable, you can invoke 'mvn site -Psite-reports' (look in site/findbugs.html).
>
> Thx, Eric
>
> On 06/19/2012 06:48 PM, Timothy Prepscius wrote:
>> K, I'll post a stack trace tomorrow. (need to wait for the connection to die)
>>
>>
>> [ optional ]
>>
>> On a lesser note, do you guys do code coverage/static analysis of james?
>>
>> Do you have a favorite tool/plugin that works well with maven and james?
>> (I'm not versed in the various maven java coverage/analysis tools)
>>
>> I'll spend some time looking tonight, but if there is an obvious choice.. etc etc etc..
>>
>> [ /optional ]
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>> -tim
>>
>>
>> On Jun 19, 2012, at 10:23 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Tim,
>>>
>>> No idea on the overhead, the connect method instanciates a few objects connecting to the remote server.
>>>
>>> If your workload is not too high, it should be all right, but don't do it via direct database access (never ever!).
>>>
>>> It would be good that you post the exception stacktrace in a JIRA so we can think to enhance the client with a JMX Connection pool (or something like that) or configure the connection with longer timeouts.
>>>
>>> Thx,
>>> Eric
>>>
>>> On 06/19/2012 02:58 PM, Timothy Prepscius wrote:
>>>> I am wondering whether anyone knows the overhead associated with the JmxServerProbe?
>>>>
>>>> So, currently, I instantiate a JMX interface and keep it around indefinitely in order to create users.
>>>> However, it eventually times out and fails to reconnect.
>>>> Thereafter, user creation fails.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So, if I use JMX, I will need to change the code to instantiate the JMX interface with each user creation.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Is this wise? What sort of overhead am I inducing by creating this JMX interface?
>>>>
>>>> I'm wondering if I should instead just write directly to the james.JAMES_USER table.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> -tim
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> eric | http://about.echarles.net | @echarles
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>>
>
> --
> eric | http://about.echarles.net | @echarles
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
Re: overhead of JmxServerProbe?
Posted by Eric Charles <er...@apache.org>.
Hi Tim,
An indication of the time needed to get the timeout will be useful.
We already have findbugs defines in the (project) pom, so if you invoke
'mvn findbugs:check' you will get a findbugs.xml in the target folder.
If you want something more readable, you can invoke 'mvn site
-Psite-reports' (look in site/findbugs.html).
Thx, Eric
On 06/19/2012 06:48 PM, Timothy Prepscius wrote:
> K, I'll post a stack trace tomorrow. (need to wait for the connection to die)
>
>
> [ optional ]
>
> On a lesser note, do you guys do code coverage/static analysis of james?
>
> Do you have a favorite tool/plugin that works well with maven and james?
> (I'm not versed in the various maven java coverage/analysis tools)
>
> I'll spend some time looking tonight, but if there is an obvious choice.. etc etc etc..
>
> [ /optional ]
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> -tim
>
>
> On Jun 19, 2012, at 10:23 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
>
>> Hi Tim,
>>
>> No idea on the overhead, the connect method instanciates a few objects connecting to the remote server.
>>
>> If your workload is not too high, it should be all right, but don't do it via direct database access (never ever!).
>>
>> It would be good that you post the exception stacktrace in a JIRA so we can think to enhance the client with a JMX Connection pool (or something like that) or configure the connection with longer timeouts.
>>
>> Thx,
>> Eric
>>
>> On 06/19/2012 02:58 PM, Timothy Prepscius wrote:
>>> I am wondering whether anyone knows the overhead associated with the JmxServerProbe?
>>>
>>> So, currently, I instantiate a JMX interface and keep it around indefinitely in order to create users.
>>> However, it eventually times out and fails to reconnect.
>>> Thereafter, user creation fails.
>>>
>>>
>>> So, if I use JMX, I will need to change the code to instantiate the JMX interface with each user creation.
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Is this wise? What sort of overhead am I inducing by creating this JMX interface?
>>>
>>> I'm wondering if I should instead just write directly to the james.JAMES_USER table.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> -tim
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>>>
>>
>> --
>> eric | http://about.echarles.net | @echarles
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
--
eric | http://about.echarles.net | @echarles
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
Re: overhead of JmxServerProbe?
Posted by Timothy Prepscius <ti...@gmail.com>.
K, I'll post a stack trace tomorrow. (need to wait for the connection to die)
[ optional ]
On a lesser note, do you guys do code coverage/static analysis of james?
Do you have a favorite tool/plugin that works well with maven and james?
(I'm not versed in the various maven java coverage/analysis tools)
I'll spend some time looking tonight, but if there is an obvious choice.. etc etc etc..
[ /optional ]
Thanks,
-tim
On Jun 19, 2012, at 10:23 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
> Hi Tim,
>
> No idea on the overhead, the connect method instanciates a few objects connecting to the remote server.
>
> If your workload is not too high, it should be all right, but don't do it via direct database access (never ever!).
>
> It would be good that you post the exception stacktrace in a JIRA so we can think to enhance the client with a JMX Connection pool (or something like that) or configure the connection with longer timeouts.
>
> Thx,
> Eric
>
> On 06/19/2012 02:58 PM, Timothy Prepscius wrote:
>> I am wondering whether anyone knows the overhead associated with the JmxServerProbe?
>>
>> So, currently, I instantiate a JMX interface and keep it around indefinitely in order to create users.
>> However, it eventually times out and fails to reconnect.
>> Thereafter, user creation fails.
>>
>>
>> So, if I use JMX, I will need to change the code to instantiate the JMX interface with each user creation.
>>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Is this wise? What sort of overhead am I inducing by creating this JMX interface?
>>
>> I'm wondering if I should instead just write directly to the james.JAMES_USER table.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -tim
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>>
>
> --
> eric | http://about.echarles.net | @echarles
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
Re: overhead of JmxServerProbe?
Posted by Eric Charles <er...@apache.org>.
Hi Tim,
No idea on the overhead, the connect method instanciates a few objects
connecting to the remote server.
If your workload is not too high, it should be all right, but don't do
it via direct database access (never ever!).
It would be good that you post the exception stacktrace in a JIRA so we
can think to enhance the client with a JMX Connection pool (or something
like that) or configure the connection with longer timeouts.
Thx,
Eric
On 06/19/2012 02:58 PM, Timothy Prepscius wrote:
> I am wondering whether anyone knows the overhead associated with the JmxServerProbe?
>
> So, currently, I instantiate a JMX interface and keep it around indefinitely in order to create users.
> However, it eventually times out and fails to reconnect.
> Thereafter, user creation fails.
>
>
> So, if I use JMX, I will need to change the code to instantiate the JMX interface with each user creation.
>
>
> ---
>
> Is this wise? What sort of overhead am I inducing by creating this JMX interface?
>
> I'm wondering if I should instead just write directly to the james.JAMES_USER table.
>
> --
>
> Thanks,
>
> -tim
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
--
eric | http://about.echarles.net | @echarles
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org