Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-camel-users-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-camel-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B96F610B25 for ; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 06:12:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 33693 invoked by uid 500); 17 Oct 2014 06:12:50 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-camel-users-archive@camel.apache.org Received: (qmail 33644 invoked by uid 500); 17 Oct 2014 06:12:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@camel.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@camel.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@camel.apache.org Received: (qmail 33631 invoked by uid 99); 17 Oct 2014 06:12:49 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 06:12:49 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.8 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,URI_HEX X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of nzipsi@gmail.com designates 209.85.213.177 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.213.177] (HELO mail-ig0-f177.google.com) (209.85.213.177) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 06:12:43 +0000 Received: by mail-ig0-f177.google.com with SMTP id a13so302228igq.10 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2014 23:12:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=EQURaZIp7Ncy6kgp4I0c5V4HMJBXjAdHJj7jx0vkeNI=; b=NXv+/HzGV//CYpGxFxHau5w+DB9p8z8rBz/rf6PtUBvZ2Rql1IK7WaVXTT+DeMIVm9 USILc6coRrdOdpzvumgmAj4ZQ06pe3Jth34WlCMYhf3VBeeFZ3cDmihBIz79YyC3DR7q 4Qm91wOwhN2ifouiuOHNrAotHYfwivwo966B5OpJcA9uMKPGdx53637O6hCL+x9msggh MI5BDnlwIidvPIhB5ClR5Re0C6r+E5iWBilneYlaED5CXvzhAdNE1uhXGhg2yridQVw2 jQ4L8TSNjPpt3D4GCN6fgqX8voqS7Ptm83fR3m2kqAhS/NnAQWR63x8YDxsotZX1fDXy FvWQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.112.70 with SMTP id io6mr19879657igb.15.1413526343470; Thu, 16 Oct 2014 23:12:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.107.43.17 with HTTP; Thu, 16 Oct 2014 23:12:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1413492094450-5757634.post@n5.nabble.com> References: <1413492094450-5757634.post@n5.nabble.com> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 17:12:23 +1100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Not all processors are listed in JMX, preventing detailed route statistics/profiling From: Andrew Thorburn To: users@camel.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b3a97ea95574f0505983f27 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --047d7b3a97ea95574f0505983f27 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I've seen issues like this in HawtIO, and it's actually a Jolokia issue. Basically, Jolokia will only fetch the first N elements (unsorted, I believe) from the server, and if your MBean isn't one of those N, then... bugger? The solution is to go into HawtIO / Preferences / Jolokia, and change Max Collection Size from 500 (the default) up to a larger number. I went to 5000, and all of a sudden all my routes appeared in the Camel console, and in the JMX tab. This will have an impact on browser performance, but I'm not sure there's much that can be done, apart from raising a feature request with Jolokia / HawtIO-Camel to fetch only a subset of available MBeans, rather than fetching them all and filtering on the client-side. Now, if you're looking at the JMX info through a different source (not HawtIO/Jolokia) and still not seeing them all, then this probably won't help much. - Andrew On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:41 AM, BlackTie wrote: > I have a webapp using Camel (v2.13.2) about to go into production, at the > point of trying to tune things for performance. I'm having an issue with > getting detail statistics for some routes, though. I'm using Hawtio 1.2, > and for some routes, Hawtio is displaying the statistics for each processor > in the route, and others it only shows the statistics at the route level. > I > checked JMX with jconsole and noticed that, for the routes that don't show > specifics for the processors, the processors in those routes are not listed > under the processors section in JMX. Some routes with this problem are > complex, others are fairly simple. > > Any ideas what would cause some to/choice/multicast/etc processors from not > being listed in JMX at all? Without the statistics, it makes it very > difficult to figure out where things are slowing down when the system is > under heavy load. > > The jmxAgent is enabled for the camel context, with statisticsLevel set to > All. > > Thanks for any help you can provide on this problem! > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Not-all-processors-are-listed-in-JMX-preventing-detailed-route-statistics-profiling-tp5757634.html > Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > --047d7b3a97ea95574f0505983f27--