Wang Lei wrote:
At first ,thank you for your reply.
I tried it as you wrote.
The result keeps the same.

Are you still running multithreaded test runner from the initial post?

If so, it's just a fact that you are asking for 500 brokers at approximately
the same time in your test runner (as Steve Clark pointed out).

Also, you have no way of getting reproducable results using an inherit
multithreaded race-condition where the number of threads active in parallell
is dependent on execution speed of the JVM and your hardware.
(If you monitor Oracle sessions with your multithreaded test runner,
you might see only 2 active in parallell beacuse all other threads had time
to finish,
or you might see 500 active in parallell because the for-loop with Thread
start was fast enough to start them all, but no thread is yet finished with
RBDMS-ops.)

If you want to try the semantics "acquire a broker, perform op, close broker"
sequentially 500 times to check for Connection leaks you just use a single-
threaded test runner with a for-loop instead of 500 threads.


I can't really tell which code you are running and what you still consider
to be a problem. (I realise this is a language problem, so plead bear with me
while I try to read you correctly - I am also not a native English speaker
so we have some "filtering" in both ends.) :-)

Please supply more details so we can follow up on the SequenceManager
configuration changes you posted. Most important is: exactly which test runner
code are you using at the moment and exactly what are the semantics you
are trying to test (ie how do you define your "connection leak" and what
do you think is the expected result).

Regards,
 Martin


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to