Hi, Unfortunately, the same result with dbcp2. I also turned on mysql general query log and can see the commit come through after the select comes in on another connection:
2017-04-26T19:46:22.243742Z 20038 Query INSERT INTO SmileDB.customer_profile ... <removed> 2017-04-26T19:46:22.245984Z 20038 Query SELECT LAST_INSERT_ID() 2017-04-26T19:46:22.291193Z 20038 Query select @@session.tx_read_only 2017-04-26T19:46:22.317914Z 20031 Query SET autocommit=0 2017-04-26T19:46:22.318088Z 20031 Query SELECT * FROM SmileDB.customer_profile WHERE CUSTOMER_PROFILE_ID=1267253 AND STATUS='AC' 2017-04-26T19:46:22.372481Z 20038 Query commit And here is the log of the lifecycle listener getting commit called: 2017/04/26 21:46:22.293 FINE [TomEE-Exec-31][301][com. smilecoms.commons.base.lifecycle.SmileConnectionLifecycleInterceptor.commit] |Commit called On 26 April 2017 at 17:12, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: > maybe switch to dbcp pool to see if it behaves the same, if not can be an > equals/hashcode issue > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibuca > u> | > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE Factory > <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> > > 2017-04-26 16:45 GMT+02:00 Paul Carter-Brown < > paul.carter-br...@smilecoms.com>: > > > Hi Romain, > > > > In order to better understand the commit timing, I have put some logging > in > > a custom MySQL ConnectionLifecycleInterceptor so that I can do a stack > > trace when commit is called and see where it's called relative to the > SOAP > > service invocation. I also put a Thread.sleep(1000) in the commit method > of > > my ConnectionLifecycleInterceptor to see how it influenced the response > > going back to the client. Whats very strange is that the 1000ms sleep > does > > result in the response taking almost 1000ms longer. I say almost, because > > again when running with multiple threads, I can get a situation where the > > response beats the completion of the commit. I cannot create this when > the > > client has only one thread. Here is a log snippet showing the scenario: > > > > 1) Here is our ConnectionLifecycleInterceptor getting the commit call and > > logging the stack before sleeping for 1000ms. Its committing a new row > with > > ID 615867 > > 2017/04/26 16:22:50.592 FINE > > [TomEE-Exec-15][207][com.smilecoms.commons.base.lifecycle. > > SmileConnectionLifecycleInterceptor.commit] > > |Commit called > > 2017/04/26 16:22:50.593 FINE > > [TomEE-Exec-15][207][com.smilecoms.commons.base.lifecycle. > > SmileConnectionLifecycleInterceptor.commit] > > |Stack in commit. Sleeping now: > > java.lang.Exception > > at > > com.smilecoms.commons.base.lifecycle.SmileConnectionLifecycleInterc > > eptor.commit(SmileConnectionLifecycleInterceptor.java:32) > > at com.mysql.jdbc.ConnectionImpl$2.forEach(ConnectionImpl.java: > > 1593) > > at com.mysql.jdbc.ConnectionImpl$2.forEach(ConnectionImpl.java: > > 1592) > > at com.mysql.jdbc.IterateBlock.doForAll(IterateBlock.java:61) > > at com.mysql.jdbc.ConnectionImpl.commit(ConnectionImpl.java:159 > 9) > > at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor137.invoke(Unknown Source) > > at > > sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( > > DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) > > at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498) > > at > > org.apache.tomcat.jdbc.pool.ProxyConnection.invoke( > > ProxyConnection.java:126) > > at > > org.apache.tomcat.jdbc.pool.JdbcInterceptor.invoke( > > JdbcInterceptor.java:108) > > at > > org.apache.tomcat.jdbc.pool.DisposableConnectionFacade.invoke( > > DisposableConnectionFacade.java:81) > > at com.sun.proxy.$Proxy58.commit(Unknown Source) > > at > > org.apache.openejb.resource.jdbc.managed.local.LocalXAResource.commit( > > LocalXAResource.java:131) > > at > > org.apache.geronimo.transaction.manager.TransactionImpl.commitResource( > > TransactionImpl.java:627) > > at > > org.apache.geronimo.transaction.manager.TransactionImpl.commit( > > TransactionImpl.java:305) > > at > > org.apache.geronimo.transaction.manager.TransactionManagerImpl.commit( > > TransactionManagerImpl.java:252) > > at > > org.apache.openejb.core.transaction.JtaTransactionPolicy. > > completeTransaction(JtaTransactionPolicy.java:331) > > at > > org.apache.openejb.core.transaction.TxRequired.commit(TxRequ > ired.java:76) > > at > > org.apache.openejb.core.transaction.EjbTransactionUtil.afterInvoke( > > EjbTransactionUtil.java:77) > > at > > org.apache.openejb.core.stateless.StatelessContainer._ > > invoke(StatelessContainer.java:271) > > at > > org.apache.openejb.core.stateless.StatelessContainer. > > invoke(StatelessContainer.java:212) > > at > > org.apache.openejb.server.cxf.ejb.EjbMethodInvoker. > > preEjbInvoke(EjbMethodInvoker.java:125) > > at > > org.apache.openejb.server.cxf.ejb.EjbMethodInvoker.invoke( > > EjbMethodInvoker.java:82) > > at > > org.apache.cxf.service.invoker.AbstractInvoker. > > invoke(AbstractInvoker.java:74) > > at > > org.apache.cxf.interceptor.ServiceInvokerInterceptor$1. > > run(ServiceInvokerInterceptor.java:59) > > at > > java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511) > > at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:266) > > at > > org.apache.cxf.interceptor.ServiceInvokerInterceptor$2. > > run(ServiceInvokerInterceptor.java:126) > > at > > org.apache.cxf.workqueue.SynchronousExecutor.execute( > > SynchronousExecutor.java:37) > > at > > org.apache.cxf.interceptor.ServiceInvokerInterceptor.handleMessage( > > ServiceInvokerInterceptor.java:131) > > at > > org.apache.cxf.phase.PhaseInterceptorChain.doIntercept( > > PhaseInterceptorChain.java:308) > > at > > org.apache.cxf.transport.ChainInitiationObserver.onMessage( > > ChainInitiationObserver.java:121) > > at > > org.apache.cxf.transport.http.AbstractHTTPDestination.invoke( > > AbstractHTTPDestination.java:262) > > at > > org.apache.openejb.server.cxf.CxfWsContainer.onMessage( > > CxfWsContainer.java:85) > > at > > org.apache.openejb.server.webservices.WsServlet.service(WsSe > rvlet.java:98) > > at > > org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.internalDoFilter( > > ApplicationFilterChain.java:230) > > at > > org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.doFilter( > > ApplicationFilterChain.java:165) > > at > > org.apache.catalina.core.StandardWrapperValve.invoke( > > StandardWrapperValve.java:198) > > at > > org.apache.catalina.core.StandardContextValve.invoke( > > StandardContextValve.java:96) > > at > > org.apache.catalina.core.StandardHostValve.invoke( > > StandardHostValve.java:140) > > at > > org.apache.catalina.valves.ErrorReportValve.invoke( > > ErrorReportValve.java:79) > > at > > org.apache.tomee.catalina.OpenEJBSecurityListener$RequestCap > turer.invoke( > > OpenEJBSecurityListener.java:97) > > at > > org.apache.catalina.core.StandardEngineValve.invoke( > > StandardEngineValve.java:87) > > at > > org.apache.catalina.connector.CoyoteAdapter.service( > > CoyoteAdapter.java:349) > > at > > org.apache.coyote.http11.Http11Processor.service(Http11Proce > ssor.java:783) > > at > > org.apache.coyote.AbstractProcessorLight.process( > > AbstractProcessorLight.java:66) > > at > > org.apache.coyote.AbstractProtocol$ConnectionHandler.process( > > AbstractProtocol.java:798) > > at > > org.apache.tomcat.util.net.NioEndpoint$SocketProcessor. > > doRun(NioEndpoint.java:1434) > > at > > org.apache.tomcat.util.net.SocketProcessorBase.run( > > SocketProcessorBase.java:49) > > at > > java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker( > > ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142) > > at > > java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run( > > ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617) > > at > > org.apache.tomcat.util.threads.TaskThread$WrappingRunnable.run( > > TaskThread.java:61) > > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745) > > > > 2) Now here is the clients request being processed in our EJB looking for > > the row that was created above but is not finished committing yet. The > row > > with ID 615867 is not found. > > 2017/04/26 16:22:51.588 FINE > > [TomEE-Exec-10][202][com.smilecoms.im.IdentityManager.getCustomers] > > |Looking up a single customer with ID [615867] > > 3) Here is the sleep having finished. > > 2017/04/26 16:22:51.594 FINE > > [TomEE-Exec-15][207][com.smilecoms.commons.base.lifecycle. > > SmileConnectionLifecycleInterceptor.commit] > > |Commit sleep finished > > > > I would expect that only after 2017/04/26 16:22:51.594 would the client > > receive the SOAP response to the insert but clearly that is not the case. > > It is slowed down by the sleep but there still seems to be some race > > condition where it somehow can still beat the commit returning. If the > > commit were called after sending the response or in parallel to doing so > > then I would have expected the 1000ms sleep to not impact the response > time > > of the service. Very very strange.... > > > > Here is the code snippet of my SmileConnectionLifecycleInterceptor: > > > > public class SmileConnectionLifecycleInterceptor implements > > ConnectionLifecycleInterceptor { > > > > private static final Logger log = > > LoggerFactory.getLogger(SmileConnectionLifecycleInterceptor.class); > > > > > > @Override > > public boolean commit() throws SQLException { > > log.debug("Commit called"); > > log.debug("Stack in commit. Sleeping now: ", new Exception()); > > try { > > Thread.sleep(1000); > > } catch (Exception e) { > > > > } > > log.debug("Commit sleep finished"); > > return true; > > } > > ... > > > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > Paul > > > > On 26 April 2017 at 13:50, Paul Carter-Brown < > > paul.carter-br...@smilecoms.com> wrote: > > > > > Thought so. Let me try and create a reproducable test case and let you > > > know what i find > > > > > > Paul > > > > > > Sent from my phone. Message may be brief and contain typos. > > > > > > > > > On 26 Apr 2017 13:35, "Romain Manni-Bucau" <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hi > > >> > > >> Shouldn't be possible since it would assume this flow: > > >> > > >> thread1. start tx | thread2. - > > >> thread1. create the entry | thread2. - > > >> thread1. serialize the entry | thread2. - > > >> thread1. commit tx | thread2. - find the entry > > >> thread1. | thread2. - fails > > >> > > >> The commit will happen > > >> in org.apache.openejb.server.cxf.ejb.EjbMethodInvoker#invoke where > the > > >> serialization happens after > > >> in org.apache.cxf.jaxb.io.DataWriterImpl#write(java.lang.Object, > > >> org.apache.cxf.service.model.MessagePartInfo, T) > > >> > > >> Only case it should be possible to happen is if you wrapped jaxws > > >> servlet/layer with a custom transaction management (through a filter > for > > >> instance) which would start/commit outside default JAXWS handling. > > >> > > >> > > >> Romain Manni-Bucau > > >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > > >> <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog > > >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < > > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau> | > > >> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE Factory > > >> <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> > > >> > > >> 2017-04-26 12:59 GMT+02:00 Paul Carter-Brown < > > >> paul.carter-br...@smilecoms.com>: > > >> > > >> > Hi > > >> > > > >> > I have a call flow as follows in tomee: > > >> > > > >> > 1. Client calls jaxws service that adds a row into mysql table. EJB > is > > >> > using JTA with eclipselink JPA entity bean. Seevice returns the > > primary > > >> key > > >> > of the row just added. > > >> > 2. Client uses returned soap message that contains the primary key > and > > >> > calls a second service that does a select for the row in question. > > >> > > > >> > The service in 1 and 2 is in the same tomee instance and caching in > > jpa > > >> is > > >> > disabled. Tx isolation isread committed. > > >> > > > >> > Under high load and concurrency doing about 1000 tps i get about a > 20% > > >> > failure rate where the service at stage 2 cannot find the row > inserted > > >> at > > >> > stage 1. The row is inserted at some stage as i do see it in the db. > > >> Its as > > >> > though service 1 is returning prior to the database having committed > > the > > >> > data. My understanding is that this should not be possible as it > would > > >> > create all sorts of inconsistencies. Is what i am observing expected > > >> > behaviour? > > >> > > > >> > Paul > > >> > > > >> > Sent from my phone. Message may be brief and contain typos. > > >> > > > >> > -- > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > This email is subject to the disclaimer of Smile Communications at > > >> > http://www.smilecoms.com/home/email-disclaimer/ < > > >> http://www.smilecoms.com/ > > >> > disclaimer> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > *Paul Carter-Brown* > > > > *Group Chief Information Officer* > > > > *Smile Communications Pty (Ltd) * > > Smile +234 (0) 702 000 1234 > > Mobile +27 (0) 83 4427 179 > > Skype PaulC-B > > paul.carter-br...@smilecoms.com > > www.smilecoms.com > > > > -- > > > > > > This email is subject to the disclaimer of Smile Communications at > > http://www.smilecoms.com/home/email-disclaimer/ < > http://www.smilecoms.com/ > > disclaimer> > > > > > -- *Paul Carter-Brown* *Group Chief Information Officer* *Smile Communications Pty (Ltd) * Smile +234 (0) 702 000 1234 <+234%20702%20000%201234> Mobile +27 (0) 83 4427 179 Skype PaulC-B paul.carter-br...@smilecoms.com www.smilecoms.com -- This email is subject to the disclaimer of Smile Communications at http://www.smilecoms.com/home/email-disclaimer/ <http://www.smilecoms.com/disclaimer>
