On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 9:23 AM, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > On 24 Sep 2014 at 08:58:56, Thomas Mortagne > ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:48 PM, [email protected] wrote: >> > Hi devs, >> > >> > Right now there’s a problem when XWiki is shutdown. This is what currently >> > happens: >> > >> > 2014-09-23 13:54:05,563 [Thread-1] DEBUG o.x.shutdown - Starting XWiki >> > shutdown... >> > 2014-09-23 13:54:05,563 [Thread-1] DEBUG o.x.shutdown - Stopping Database >> > Connection Pool... >> > 2014-09-23 13:54:05,735 [Thread-1] DEBUG o.x.shutdown - Database >> > Connection Pool has been stopped >> > 2014-09-23 13:54:10,513 [Thread-1] DEBUG o.x.shutdown - Stopping component >> > [org.xwiki.localization.wiki.internal.DocumentTranslationBundleFactory]… >> > 2014-09-23 13:54:10,513 [Thread-1] DEBUG o.x.shutdown - Component >> > [org.xwiki.localization.wiki.internal.DocumentTranslationBundleFactory] >> > has been stopped >> > … >> > 2014-09-23 13:54:10,514 [Thread-1] DEBUG o.x.shutdown - Stopping component >> > [org.xwiki.search.solr.internal.DefaultSolrIndexer]... >> > 2014-09-23 13:54:10,514 [Thread-1] DEBUG o.x.shutdown - Component >> > [org.xwiki.search.solr.internal.DefaultSolrIndexer] has been stopped >> > … >> > 2014-09-23 13:54:10,539 [Thread-1] INFO o.x.shutdown - XWiki shutdown has >> > been completed. >> > >> > As you can see the problem is that the DB is stopped first. So any code >> > accessing the DB will get an error once the connection pool is stopped. >> > This is why we get a lot stack traces when you ctrl-c XWiki quickly after >> > it starts (i.e. when the init is not finished or when SOLR is still >> > indexing). You can also get stack traces if a watchlist is being sent or >> > some scheduler job is executing for example. >> > >> > There are 2 ways to fix this: >> > - solution 1: all code that accesses the DB could check if an XWiki >> > shutdown is in progress and don’t generate stack traces if this is the case >> > - solution 2: stop the DB as the last thing, after everything else has >> > stopped >> > >> > Obviously solution 2 is much better. >> > >> > I’ve started implementing it by doing this: >> > - Remove the current HibernateShutdownEventListener since this is executed >> > first during shutdown, before component disposal >> > - Instead have XWikiHibernateStore implement Disposable and move the >> > content of HibernateShutdownEventListener in that method >> > >> > This works already better but it’s not enough since ECM.dispose() works >> > out the component dependencies but this works only for explicit >> > dependencies and doesn’t work if a component uses the ComponentManager to >> > dynamically find implementations (as this is the case for example for >> > DefaultSolrIndexer). >> > >> > Thus in order to help the component disposal process, I propose to >> > introduce a new annotation: @DisposePriority(int). >> > >> > Note that an alternative would be to introduce a new Disposable interface >> > with a new getPriority() method in it (we cannot modify the current >> > Disposable since that would break backward compat). >> >> It's always hard to know what priority to put exactly so this is last >> resort solution for me. > > The idea is to use this only for special cases (like DB shutdown) since in > the majority of cases the component dependency order would be enough. So in > these few cases it’s quite easy and similar to Macro priority (which hasn’t > proved to be a problem so far and is working well). > >> A few other alternatives: >> 1) stop the DB after disposing components (I would not vote for it I >> think but it should work for this use case) > > Yes I thought about this but I wanted something a bit more generic. See at > the end of this email though. > >> 2) introduce something like a @ComponentDependency annotation to let >> component declare indirect dependencies (ECM#dispose would simply add >> @ComponentDependency annotations to its current dependencies based >> ordering) and: >> 2.1) even when a component does not directly use XWikiStoreInterface >> (pretty much all of them are using XWiki methods and don't even know >> about it officially) we could still ask them to declare something like >> @ComponentDependency(XWikiStoreInterface.class) to indicate that they >> want to be disposed after any component of this role. > > Yes I had also thought about this one but discarded because it means finding > all components using indirectly XWikiStoreInterface and modifying them all. > This means a lot of places (since a lot of places use the XWiki class for > example) and a lot of work. > > I also find it a lot more complex to implement than a priority order which > seems really the most simple solution.
The dependencies based ordering is already what we have and 2) is just about adding more depdencies. The first need is to add the annotation in the few places where we have the issue (only SOLR right now AFAIK) so no it does not really mean "finding all components using indirectly XWikiStoreInterface and modifying them all" right away. > >> 2.2) make XWiki instance a component instead of storing it in the >> servlet context and inject it instead of accessing it through >> XWikiContext (XWiki itself would inject the component it want). XWiki >> itself would declare a >> @ComponentDependency(XWikiStoreInterface.class). >> 2.3) move all storage related methods from XWiki (saveDocument, >> getDocument, etc) to another component (and remove XWikiContext >> parameter to all these methods) which would be injected by components >> directly instead of searching for the XWikiContext (that's how new >> model will work but we can have another one before that still expose >> olcore APIs like XWikiDocument). Then this component would take care >> of declaring the @ComponentDependency(XWikiStoreInterface.class) (it's >> not really possible to directly inject the right XWikiStoreInterface >> since it's configuration based) > > These 2 alternatives are ok but they are a lot of work and could be done in > the future. I was trying to find a solution that can be applied in 1/2 day > right now. We need to fix our bug now and I fear we’ll just not do anything > if we wait for 2.2 and 2.3 (which we can do on the longer run). 2.3 is mostly copy pasting and start using the new component in the few places that have ordering issue (pretty much only SOLR right now). Changing other places is not a priority, it's not like we were refactoring the whole code each time we introduce a new API. > > Since you don’t agree about priority and since I’d like to fix the shutdown > “bug” for 6.2.x and on 6.3M1 now, I’m proposing the following alternative for > now: > > * Introduce a new constructor in the ApplicationStoppedEvent class: > ApplicationStoppedEvent(boolean afterDispose) > * Modify XWikiServletContextListener.contextDestroyed() so that it sends the > ApplicationStoppedEvent(false) before calling cm.dispose() and it sends the > ApplicationStoppedEvent(true) after calling cm.dispose() > * Keep HibernateShutdownEventListener but make it listen to > ApplicationStoppedEvent(true) > > This will ensure it’s called after all components have been disposed. I doubt that would work. If the CM is disposed HibernateShutdownEventListener won't exist anymore (and I'm not talking about using the observation manager which is going to be disposed officially, it's not doing anything special when disposed right now but it might). > > WDYT? Acceptable? > > Thanks > -Vincent > >> > The idea is then to use this information in ECM.dispose() to first sort >> > all components based on this and then only to order them with their >> > dependencies. >> > >> > WDYT? >> > >> > Thanks >> > -Vincent > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs -- Thomas Mortagne _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
