How can I set concurrent policy for a provider?

Has anyone experimented with different settings for concurrent reads?  I
have set our servers to 4 ( 2 per processor core ).  I have noticed that
occasionally, our pending reads will get backed up and our servers don't
appear to be under too much load.  In fact, most of the load appears to be
from GC.  Is 3 per processor core too much?  Does it matter if it is an
AMC
vs Intel processor?  How does processor clock speed or cache play into
this
setting?

Lee Parker

Hi,

a few days ago I've tweeted a wish to have view generation done
concurrent. I'll tell you why (because @janl doesn't think so).

I've got some documents in the form of:

_id: 1,
_rev: 3-abc, 
url: http://www.abc.com,
hrefs: [http://www.xyz.com, 
	http://www.nbc.com,
	...,
	...,
	...]

As you can imagine me crawling the web, I got plenty of them. And every
second thousands more. I've got a view, map.py is:

def fun(doc):    
    h = hash
    if doc.has_key("hrefs"):
        for href in doc["hrefs"]:
            yield (h(href), href), None

reduce.py is:

def fun(key, value, rereduce):
    return True

If you're not able to read python code: it's generating a large list of
unique pseudo-randomly ordered urls. I'm calling this view quite often
(to get new urls to be crawled). 

What is my problem now? My couchdb process is at 100%cpu and the view
needs sometimes quite long to be generated (even if I got only testing
data about 5-10 GB). I've got 4 cores and 3 of them are sleeping. I
think it could be way more faster if every core was used. What does
couchdb do with a very large system, let's say 64 atom cores (which
would be in an idle mode energy saving) and 20TB of data? Using 1 core
with let's say 1ghz to munch down 20TB? Oh please. 

Why doesn't couchdb use all cores to generate views?

Regards
Julian

P.S.: Maybe I'm totally wrong and the way you do it is right, but ATM it
makes me mad to see one core out of four working and the rest is idle.

Hello.

Camel is able to process messages from one queue concurrently. For final
application it is a good feature: it decreases time to process batch of
messages.

At the stage of debug it is may be a little discomfort: order of output
messages may differ from order of input messages. To prevent it, the
route-builder URI of endpoint may be expanded with
"?maxConcurrentConsumers"
option.

The problem appears when I want to reconfigure the existing route. I can
modify the endpoint

    for (Endpoint endpoint : camelContext.getEndpoints()) {
        ((JmsEndpoint) endpoint).setMaxConcurrentConsumers(1);
    }

but this will not affect the existing consumers.

We can look at listener container

((JmsConsumer)
    (context.getRoutes().get(0).getConsumer()))
        .getListenerContainer()

It have a default value of maxConcurrentConsumer=20, it is not changed.

Is it possible to reconfigure routes at runtime to change the value of
maxConcurrentConsumers?


Thank you for your attention.

Hi All,
We see a serious Write lock contention issue when we are trying to write
to
jackrabbit through different jcr sessions.

We see huge number of threads waiting on a write lock when a session.save
is
done.

All threads are writing to a different part of the repository but it seems
as per the SharedItemStateManager 

design we have just one Write Lock  for the entire workspace.

We tried with FineGrained Locks but that doesnt help either as it just
optimizes read and still we have a single Write lock.

Thoughts/Suggestions

Regards
Shashank

     [
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse...nels:all-tabpanel
]

Kiran Ayyagari closed DIRSERVER-894.

     [
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse...nels:all-tabpanel
]

Carl Steinbach updated HIVE-80:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I came across following site (http://junit.org/node/589) talking about
concurrent execution if junit tests and couldn't resist to give it a try
on the shared project. I used the same configuration in the page shown
(threads=6) and added it to all tests in the shared project. It's 10
seconds faster (64s <-> 54s) what is ~16%.

IMO it's worth to have a closer look at it also when thinking of larger
tests in the apacheds project.

WDOT?
Felix


without concurrency:
[INFO]
- 

Hi all,
I have implemented a Provider for my web service but the request doesn't
pass into my provider. To declare my provider I only have added there 2
lines before my class:
@javax.xml.ws.WebServiceProvider(portName="HelloWorldSoapBinding",
serviceName="HelloWorld")
@javax.xml.ws.ServiceMode(value = javax.xml.ws.Service.Mode.MESSAGE)

Is there no other thing to do?

thanks a lot,
Fabian.

    [
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse...7#action_12893557
] 

Adam Cooney commented on JCR-2579:

Hello,

Here is how I am trying to make sure sudo is installed on my solaris
boxes:

            package {'sudo':
              ensure => 'installed',
              provider => 'blastwave',
              adminfile => '/usr/local/etc/adminfile',
            }

The package is installed, but every time puppetd executes, I get this:

	notice: //base_server/Package[sudo]/ensure: created

It seems like the package provider is not seeing that sudo is already
installed….
How can I fix that?

Both my puppetmaster and puppetd are 0.25.5

Thanks,

Don

  Hi all,

I'm currently investigating the possibility of implementing a JSSE 
provider wrapping OpenSSL. This has a couple of obvious advantages:
  - The onus of code maintenance and bug fixing in a security sensitive 
area is moved outside of Harmony.
  - New protocols can be integrated into the Harmony provider with 
minimal effort (updating dependencies rather than implementing them 
ourselves).

Really I'm sending this mail as a heads up, but would be interested to 
know if anyone has any experience/opinions in this area. In particular, 
I'd be interested in ideas on:
  - the best way to setup OpenSSL as a dependency - precompile the 
libraries and make them available for download or compile them at build 
time on the user's machine.
  - how to tie in the Java x-net APIs to the OpenSSL APIs.

Any comments/suggestions welcome.

Regards,
Oliver

Concurrent session access in event handlers

I've defined a jaxrs server like:

<jaxrs:server id="myService" address="http://localhost:19300/ai/" >

    <jaxrs:serviceBeans>
        <ref bean="resourceService" />
    </jaxrs:serviceBeans>
    <jaxrs:providers>
           <bean
class="org.codehaus.jackson.jaxrs.JacksonJsonProvider">
            <property name="mapper">
             <bean
                class="com.rest.json.ObjectMapperFactoryBean">
            </bean>
            </property>
           </bean>
        <ref bean="jaxbElementProvider" />
    </jaxrs:providers>
    <jaxrs:extensionMappings>
        <entry key="json" value="application/json" />
           <entry key="xml" value="application/xml" />
        </jaxrs:extensionMappings>
 </jaxrs:server>

- For some reason, when I request Json from the service the
org.apache.cxf.jaxrs.provider.JSONProvider#readFrom method is used instead
of the jackson provider. How can I remove/override the built-provider and
replace it with Jackson?

Thanks,

Hi,

    When routing from ServiceMix CXF-BC consumer to ServiceMix CXF-BC
provider, need to call a different operation of CXF provider web service.
The application uses ServiceMix and Camel JBI component. Camel is used for
routing purpose only. The route is

CXF BC consumer ----> Camel ----> CXF BC provider

For example 

operation: {http://example.org}hello

changed to

operation: {http://example.org}greet

I tried to set operation as a header in camel route but is not working.

<route>
    <from uri="jbi:service:http://example.org/helloRouteBuilder"/>
    <setHeader headerName="operationName">
        <constant>greet</constant>
    </setHeader>
    <to uri="jbi:service:http://example.org/greetingService"/>
</route>

I know that this syntax is for Camel CXF endpoints. Will it work for
ServiceMix CXF components?

Anto

I have a fairly standard setup where a front-end Apache server
forwards requests to Tomcat through mod_proxy/AJP. How can I setup
Apache/mod_proxy so it only forwards at most N (say, N=4) concurrent
requests to Tomcat? Other concurrent requests coming into Apache
should not be rejected, and should instead be queued to later be sent
to Tomcat.

PS 1: I know this is something you can do this at the Tomcat level
with the maxThreads attribute, but I prefer to handle this at the
Apache level.

PS 2: I see that Apache has a MaxClients configuration, which seems to
be doing what I am looking for. But it is not clear to me how to have
a MaxClient per server mod_proxy forwards to, rather than MaxClient
per Apache. I.e. if Apache forward requests to a cluster of 4 Tomcat
machine, I'd like Apache to limit the number of concurrent requests
forwarded to any given Tomcat to N (say, N=4).

Alex

ValueBuilder should provider the DSL for Predicate

     [
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse...nels:all-tabpanel
]

Emmanuel Lecharny closed DIRSERVER-1369.

    [
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse...3#action_12890463
] 

Brett Bergquist commented on DERBY-4437:

    [
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse...1#action_12890791
] 

Knut Anders Hatlen commented on DERBY-4437:

     [
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse...nels:all-tabpanel
]

EDAH-TALLY updated DERBY-4745: