Re: [xmlblaster-devel] Involved XMLBlaster questions

["Kelley Phillips" <Kelley.Phillips at infotechfl.com>]

Thanks Michelle,

  Setting the JVM Xms and Xmx parameters helped, but my
memory footprint definitely seemed to be growing. I noticed
in an earlier (but fairly recent) post on the mailing list
the following:

>>2. How stable is any "current release". The memory footprint of the server
>>I downloaded three weeks ago certainly grew over time. This is probably in
>>part due to xmlblaster still being actively developed.
>
>The release 0.80 is broken for 'volatile' messages.
>All the rest is considered stable, and i don't believe we have a memory
>leak there.

Although Marcel stated the release 0.80 is broken....
isn't the current release 0.80?

Would it be better to download more recent code from the CVS
repository than use the current version available from the
download section of the site?

Also, I have a need in the project I'm researching this for
to send messages in PtP mode and make them persistent (durable).
I've managed to do this, but I haven't figured out how to erase
them. The erase() method used on standard pub/sub messages
doesn't seem to work for this.

Any help with any of these issues is appreciated!

-Kelley Phillips



----- Original Message -----
From: "Michele Laghi" <laghi at swissinfo.org>
To: <xmlblaster-devel at server.xmlBlaster.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 5:21 AM
Subject: Re: [xmlblaster-devel] Involved XMLBlaster questions


> Hallo Kelley,
>
> Kelley Phillips wrote:
>
> > My company has assigned me to do the inital testing
> > of XMLBlaster as a potential MOM solution for a
> > project we recently received.
> >
> > The main need in this project is to handle point to
> > point messages in a secure and reliable way, as well
> > as handle persistance of messages and high availability.
> > Additionally, large files (currently up to about 4MB)
> > need to be able to be handled fairly efficiently, though
> > most of the traffic would be much smaller (less than 20k).
> > We alos have the restriction of needing to implement this
> > solution under Windows (both server and client side). Clients
> > will probably need to be written in C++.
>
> Currently a lot of changes are under way on the XmlBlaster, both on the
> server side and on the client side. Particularly if you plan to use c++
> clients, then I strongly suggest you checkout our latest CVS code. Not
> everything is finished yet, but you will get the latest stand of
xmlBlaster.
>
> >
> > Does this sound like a reasonable fit for XMLBlaster?
> >
> > I've uncovered a lot of positive things through testing,
> > but have hit what seems a big snag in handling largish
> > (a little over 2MB) messages.
> >
> > I modified the Ptpsend and PtpReceive examples to take
> > a -file parameter to send and receive arbitrary files.
> > After moving 2MB files in point to point mode several
> > times in a row I would generally get a "java.lang.OutOfMemoryError".
>
> >
> > I tried this using a modified version of the
> > XMLBlasterClient.pl and Server.pl perl scripts and
> > got similar results (though they seemed to hit the problem
> > sooner).
> >
> > Is this a problem with how XMLBlaster was initiated?
> > (from the .bat file which has: java -jar lib\xmlBlaster.jar)
> > Or from how I modified the java files, or from a limitation
> > of java or XMLBlaster under Windows? or...?
>
> You could try to increase the JVM parameters to give to the application
> more memory, try:
>
> -Xms and -Xms
>
> parameters, for example:
>
> -Xms128M -Xmx256M
>
> >
> > I'm attaching the modified java files (hope this isn't too much,
> > but it may be useful for someone else).
> >
> > Also, here are the command lines I used to initiate the Sender
> > and server java classes:
> > =======================
> > PtpSendInput (modified from PtpSend)
> > java PtpSendInput -client.protocol XML-RPC -numSend 1 -delay
> > 0010 -forceQueuing true -file  -xmlrpc.hostname
> >
> > PtpReceiveInput (modified from PtpReceive)
> > java PtpReceiveInput -client.protocol XML-RPC -xmlrpc.hostname  -file
> >  -abortCount 1
> > =======================
> >
> > One other problem I encountered during these same tests, were the
removing
> > of persistent PtP messages. Although I tried using the erase() method
that
> > didn't seem to do the trick...
>
> I tried to compile your examples but I have the new stand (CVS) of
> xmlBlaster and it does not compile. I will check out the old code and
> test them againt it and inform you later.
>
> >
> > Any help, comments, questions for me etc. are very appreciated.
> >
> > It looks like these last group of tests are what's standing in the
> > way of management giving the go ahead to using XMLBlaster for this
> > project.
> >
> >  -Kelley Phillips
> >
>
  --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> > ----
> > Kelley Phillips, email: Kelley.Phillips at infotechfl.com
> > Systems Analyst, Info Tech Inc.
>
>
> Cheers
> Michele