Hmmm,

I cleaned up the logging a bit, now there are no messages (except a
"invocation # x" that I haven't found the source of), and checked in
changes.  Removing the logging had no effect on the time here. I've run it
2 1/2 times without deadlock, both completions around 2800 sec. (last one
is still running). 

What kind of system are you on?

I have rh 7.1, sun jdk 1.3.1, one intel p3 600 mhz, 256 mb memory, and I'm
using Hypersonic.

Any ideas where to look for the deadlock?

david jencks



On 2001.08.17 01:07:11 -0400 Scott M Stark wrote:
> By deadlock all I mean is that it is not completing in the time alloted
> for
> the
> test. It was sitting at:
> [junit] 5678.Marc.998012741906:50.0
> [junit] 5678.Rickard.998012741907:0.0
> [junit] Time:13266
> [junit] Avg. time/call(ms):22
> [junit] Acquire customers
> [junit] Start test. 50 threads, 100 iterations
> 
> until the test timed out. With a version of main as of Monday at 23:00
> obtained using:
>     cvs co -D '2001-08-13 23:00' jboss-all
> 
> The test runs in 2912 seconds. Maybe its just the logging.
> I can't tell until that is cleaned up. Sure 10,000 tx is a reasonable
> test.
> Stress
> is good.
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Jencks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 8:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] jca changes & loaders
> 
> 
> > I can't argue with the idea that Aaron might possibly have logged
> things a
> > bit heavily, however my banktest completed successfully after 2860.064
> > seconds.  What form did this deadlock take?  Is running 50 threads
> through
> > 10 connections with ~10,000 transactions a reasonable unit test?
> >
> > david jencks
> >
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development

Reply via email to