ofbiz-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Adrian Crum <adrian.c...@sandglass-software.com>
Subject Re: Job Manager
Date Wed, 19 Sep 2012 10:21:21 GMT
Brett,

Thank you for the update. I will look into this.

-Adrian

On 9/19/2012 6:02 AM, Brett Palmer wrote:
> Adrian,
>
> I'll have to setup a load test to verify that a large number of pending
> jobs in the JobSandbox do not saturate the server.  I'll also work with the
> thread counts to see what works for us.
>
> Before I read your reply I had configured the service engine to use a
> "send-to-pool=poolX"  but did not configure any "run-from-pool" names that
> matched "poolX".  I then use the webtools interface to run a service.  The
> default pool displayed was "poolX" in the form.  I entered the service name
> and executed the service.  The service ran but I didn't expect it to run
> because there wasn't a "send-to-pool" with a matching name.  This
> functionality seems to disagree with what you said about
>
> "If you don't have a
> <run-from-pool name="pool"/>
> element somewhere, then jobs sent to the "pool" pool will not be
> serviced.", but maybe I am missing something.
>
>
>          <thread-pool send-to-pool="poolX"
>                       purge-job-days="4"
>                       failed-retry-min="3"
>                       ttl="120000"
>                       jobs="100"
>                       min-threads="2"
>                       max-threads="5"
>                       wait-millis="1000"
>                       poll-enabled="true"
>                       poll-db-millis="30000">
>              <run-from-pool name="pool"/>
>              <run-from-pool name="testPool"/>
>              <run-from-pool name="pool2"/>
>              <run-from-pool name="pool3"/>
>              <run-from-pool name="pool4"/>
>          </thread-pool>
>
> I'll post the results of my load test as soon as it is completed.
>
>
> Brett
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 2:38 AM, <adrian.crum@sandglass-software.com> wrote:
>
>> Quoting Brett Palmer <brettgpalmer@gmail.com>:
>>
>>   *Adrian,
>>>
>>> I ported our code over to the newest ofbiz trunk and tried out the changes
>>> for the new service engine.  The changes that you made are working very
>>> well.  I configured our server to use multiple pools and then scheduled
>>> various jobs to those pools.  Servers that were not configured to service
>>> the pools left the jobs dormant and servers that were configured to
>>> service
>>> the new pools did so as expected.
>>>
>> To be clear, that has always been the behavior of the Job Scheduler. I did
>> not change that.
>>
>>
>>
>>> These new changes will work for us in our production environment.  Thanks
>>> for implementing them.  I now need to work on tuning the configuration
>>> settings based on the particular jobs and the capacity of our servers.
>>>
>> The changes were intended to prevent the Job Scheduler from saturating the
>> server under heavy load. So, those are the results I would be interested in
>> hearing about.
>>
>>
>>
>>> I did have another question on the thread-pool configuration. Here is a
>>> sample configuration that I was using to do some of the testing.
>>>
>>> <thread-pool send-to-pool="pool"
>>>                      purge-job-days="4"
>>>                      failed-retry-min="3"
>>>                      ttl="120000"
>>>                      jobs="100"
>>>                      min-threads="2"
>>>                      max-threads="5"
>>>                      wait-millis="1000"
>>>                      poll-enabled="true"
>>>                      poll-db-millis="30000">
>>>             <run-from-pool name="pool"/>
>>>             <run-from-pool name="testPool"/>
>>>             <run-from-pool name="pool2"/>
>>>             <run-from-pool name="pool3"/>
>>>             <run-from-pool name="pool4"/>
>>>         </thread-pool>
>>>
>>> Is the “send-to-pool” attribute the default pool that is used by the
>>> service engine for any sync and async requests through the service engine
>>> API?
>>>
>> Correct.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Is there a relationship between the “send-to-pool” attribute and the
>>> “run-from-pool” names or are they independent of each other?  For example,
>>> if I don't have a run-from-pool element with a name="pool" will the
>>> default
>>> "pool" still work?
>>>
>> They are not related. If you don't have a
>>
>> <run-from-pool name="pool"/>
>>
>> element somewhere, then jobs sent to the "pool" pool will not be serviced.
>>
>>
>>> Thanks again for you work on the service engine.  We really appreciate it.
>>>
>>> Let me know if you need more feedback on the new changes.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Brett*
>>>
>>>
>>>
> snip
>


Mime
View raw message