If it helps, the bug of maxThreads, etc. being reset in the
start() method has been fixed for Tomcat 3.3.1 and it available
in the nightly 3.3 build.

Cheers,
Larry

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, December 31, 2001 12:44 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Tomcat 3.3: ThreadPool bug (IS IT SAFE FOR PRODUCTION
> USE???)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for your reply Jeff :-)
> 
> I am using it "behind" the Apache Web server (ajp1.3)  and am having
> serious problems to keep the service alive (not to mention the poor
> performance)
> The Tomcat is increasing the number of threads when under the load and
> inevitable finishes with ThreadPool giving up.
> The code in the ThreadPool is really "not okay" as it does 
> not provide any
> way of tuning the pools and definetly does not provide any 
> solution when
> running out of available Threads :-(
> By the way, do you have any experience with the 
> load-balancing under ajp1.3
> ... up to now I have observed only that one blocked Tomcat is 
> stalling the
> whole ajp1.3 load-balancing for the rest of the gang (I have 4 Solaris
> machine each configured with identical application).
> Also browsing a bit thrue the internet I have found quite a 
> few articles
> about Solaris and Threads in JVM ... mostly confusing me if 
> not giving me
> very bad feeling in stomach ... any comments about the 
> stability of the
> Tomcat3.3/JDK1.3.1_02/Solaris8 ???
> 
> Thanks in advance
> Drasko
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Jeff Kilbride" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 31.12.2001 06:34:42
> 
> Please respond to "Tomcat Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> To:   "Tomcat Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> cc:
> 
> Subject:  Re: Tomcat 3.3: ThreadPool bug (IS IT SAFE FOR 
> PRODUCTION USE???)
> 
> Are you using Tomcat standalone or with Apache? If 
> standalone, then yes, I
> would recommend using the latest version of Tomcat 4.x. If 
> you're using
> Apache, I would stick with 3.3 until the mod_jk code is fully 
> implemented
> with the 4.x versions.
> 
> Thanks,
> --jeff
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Tomcat Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2001 2:09 PM
> Subject: Tomcat 3.3: ThreadPool bug (IS IT SAFE FOR PRODUCTION USE???)
> 
> 
> >
> >
> > Hi there,
> >
> > I am trying to deploy our production service on the Tomcat 
> 3.3 platform
> > (Solaris8, JDK 1.3.1) but am very often facing the 
> instability problems.
> > Somehow, the ThreadPool just runs out of steam and blocks 
> Connectors from
> > receiving any more requests.
> >
> > Looking into the source code, I have noticed some very interesting
> > "constructions" in the ThreadPool class.  Namely, the 
> setters for the
> > maxThreads, maxSpareThreads and minSpareThreads are having 
> very little
> > influence as the start() method is resseting the values to 
> the default
> > constants ?!?!
> >
> >     public ThreadPool() {
> >         maxThreads      = MAX_THREADS;
> >         maxSpareThreads = MAX_SPARE_THREADS;
> >         minSpareThreads = MIN_SPARE_THREADS;
> >         currentThreadCount  = 0;
> >         currentThreadsBusy  = 0;
> >         stopThePool = false;
> >     }
> >
> >     public synchronized void start() {
> >      stopThePool=false;
> >         currentThreadCount  = 0;
> >         currentThreadsBusy  = 0;
> >         maxThreads      = MAX_THREADS;
> >         maxSpareThreads = MAX_SPARE_THREADS;
> >         minSpareThreads = MIN_SPARE_THREADS;
> >
> >         adjustLimits();
> >
> >         openThreads(minSpareThreads);
> >         monitor = new MonitorRunnable(this);
> >     }
> >
> > Also, the situation when there are no more available 
> Threads in the pool
> is being handled in a special way which JUST BLOCKS IN THE 
> INFINITE LOOP :
> > -(((
> >
> > Is the code of the Tomcat4 equaly immature or there is a 
> fair chance to
> > role a productiv system on top of it?
> >
> > Thanks in advance for any comments
> >
> > Drasko Kokic
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe:   
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > For additional commands: 
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Troubles with the list: 
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Troubles with the list: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Troubles with the list: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 

--
To unsubscribe:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Troubles with the list: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to