Mailing-List: contact dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@jakarta.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.213.172 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAOGo0VZhLfXQOTT3LZ7ui7NpuEQODq+5FRXVWkaChiE_ptRf1Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAH9fUpYVzKDZbCQJtFnHCBv+Nc6BXMbPsTyYaY8h5O5orvE1Og@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOGo0VbBLJU0N+2__CgzYwz0s+dt61sNwy75oDzEAPiJkvvBrw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOGo0VZhLfXQOTT3LZ7ui7NpuEQODq+5FRXVWkaChiE_ptRf1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 13:33:33 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CAH9fUpZTmLMhaGCsg=mPTY31O6ePRM_Jz7__8B_e7HBWgh9+WA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Issue 52044
From: Philippe Mouawad <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
To: "dev@jakarta.apache.org" <dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd482bac36da504afa535bf

--000e0cd482bac36da504afa535bf
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hello sebb,
Regarding:
> I've just realised there is a reason why the Context was being cached.
>
> The Context holds execution context, so needs to be maintained between
> samplers in the same thread.

If it was the case then there was an issue in this, because 2 threads could
share the same Context in initial implementation.
Maybe an issue with perf, I will add thread name to key
Regards

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 8:02 AM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 18 October 2011 22:21, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 18 October 2011 19:50, Philippe Mouawad
> > <p.mouawad@ubik-ingenierie.com> wrote:
> >> Hello Sebb, Milamber , All,
> >> I investigated this issue, particularly this part of issue
> >>
> >>> stramge error for "JMS Subscriber - 001" - Response message:
> >>> javax.naming.NamingException: Something already bound at
Elite_To_MorphoTrak;
> >>
> >> I created a simple test case and tried not to cache Context and it
works
> >> fine.
> >> and in fact it is due to the fact that we cache Context and use it by
many
> >> threads.
> >> From this:
> >> http://download.oracle.com/javase/jndi/tutorial/beyond/misc/sync.html
> >>
> >> I conclude we should not do caching as it is not mandatory that context
is
> >> Thread Safe (and it's not the case for AMQ one).
> >>
> >> Do you remember why Context were cached ? was it because of bad
performances
> >> if not cached ?
> >
> > I think that was before my time.
> >
> >> There are 2 solutions for that:
> >>
> >>   - We remove caching
> >>   - We add an  option in GUI to let user select if Context will be
cached
> >>   or not
> >
> > Or we cache per thread, e.g. using ThreadLocal.
>
> I've just realised there is a reason why the Context was being cached.
>
> The Context holds execution context, so needs to be maintained between
> samplers in the same thread.
>
> One easy way to fix the context sharing across threads would be to
> include the thread name in the context key.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>


--
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.

--000e0cd482bac36da504afa535bf--