Hi all, Apologies for bumping this one - I was sure somebody would be able to respond to this. We're seeing some really poor performance on some of our higher load servers, but the problem is that to run profilers on them when they're under load is just not feasible. So I'd like to know whether if ~800 concurrent connections were pinging, would the below configuration be limited to the pool of 16 AnonymousIoService objects and would this result in pegging the CPU really high? Should I be switching to the manual threading model as per my second post on this thread?
Regards, Darryl ________________________________ From: Darryl Pentz <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Fri, October 16, 2009 9:03:04 AM Subject: Configuring MINA 1.1.7 Acceptor - best practise Hi all, We are busy upgrading our server product to use MINA 2.0 but that exercise is part of a broader refactoring exercise that will take a while longer. In the meantime I just want to check that we are using an acceptable initialization strategy for our MINA 1.1.7 usage. In the docs, it says that one should never use the default threading model but that in fact we should set it to manual. We currently do not do this, and I wonder if anybody could indicate whether this will be problematic for us: ... ByteBuffer.setUseDirectBuffers(false); ByteBuffer.setAllocator(new SimpleByteBufferAllocator()); acceptor = new SocketAcceptor(); SocketAcceptorConfig cfg = new SocketAcceptorConfig(); cfg.getFilterChain().addLast("handshake", new HandshakeFilter()); cfg.getFilterChain().addLast("tunnel", new TunnelFilter()); ProtocolCodecFilter codec = new ProtocolCodecFilter(new HttpServerProtocolCodecFactory()); cfg.getFilterChain().addLast("httpcodec", codec); ControlServerHandler handler = new ControlServerHandler(); handler.setApplicationContext(channelController.getApplicationContext()); handler.setChannelController(channelController); handler.setControlChannelTimeout(ccTimeout); log.info("Starting control channel server socket on port " + port); acceptor.bind(new InetSocketAddress(port), handler, cfg); ... Ignoring the stuff specific to our app, like the custom filters and that ControlServerHandler.setChannelController() etc, when I look in the VM thread list, I see the typical AnonymousIoService-1..16 but I read somewhere that this could mean an unoptimal configuration (can't find where that was now unf.). When I look at the threads in JVisualVM, I notice that the AnonymousIoService threads are generally in WAIT state with only one or two showing 'green' blocks (i.e. RUNNING) every now and again, even though there *should* be activity from a number of remote socket connections. So I'm concerned that we're not setting things up correctly. Is the above configuration appropriate for 1.1.7 usage? Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Warm Regards, Darryl Pentz
