Thank you Simon. There is no dead locks reported by jstack. Also, I print state info in SESSION_IDLE event handling every 2 seconds, all sessions are in a same state (STATE_A). My statemachine expects a MESSAGE_SENT event to trigger it transit from STATE_A to STATE_B, it is obvious that the session receives no MESSAGE_SENT events any more.
It also seems to have no memory leak issue. The process uses about 70M memory. After performed manually GC, it decreased to about 50M, still no client-side session released for the NioDatagramConnector still reports 5000 sessions. Any help is appreciated. Regards, -Bing 2008/9/4 Simon Trudeau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Interresting, I am currently investigating a similar issue. Have you > tried detecting deadlocks using Jstack? There is currently an open issue > with Mina statemachine and deadlocks. Although it only occurs when you > have 2 statemachines acting as I/O filters. > > http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/J2SE/monitoring/ > > On my end I think I have a memory leak which causes your behavior but so > far it turns out to be hard to reproduce and diagnose (my code or > mina...) > > Good luck, > > > Simon > -----Original Message----- > From: JianXing Yi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: September-03-08 4:01 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Why UDP sessions dropped? > > Hello all, > > Use case: > 1 NioDatagramConnector, 5000 sessions. Each session has a sate machine > and its unique context. Each session simply loop to request from a > server and start a new request after the previous response received. The > SESSION_IDLE event has been handled every 2 seconds. > > MINA version: MINA-2.0.0-M3 > > At start, the 5000 sessions all can be successfully established, also > the request-response cycle running well. Everything seems to be fine. > After running several minutes, the server shows session number decreased > to > 2000+ or 1000+ and finally 0. > > From the client viewpoint, the NioDatagramConnector shows the number of > its managed sessions is alwayls 5000 but its CPU usage drops from >90% > to 0% with no actual UDP traffic. > > Any idea? Thank you very much. > > Regards, > -Bing >
