0 Replies Latest reply on Oct 2, 2018 9:27 AM by Torsten Römer

    Connections from java:/JmsXA being used concurrently

    Torsten Römer Newbie

      In WildFly 10.1.0.Final (but also already with 8.2.1.Final) installations with higher load (no cluster), we often see that the same JMS connection obtained from the "java:/JmsXA" connection pool is used by two threads at the same time, causing the communication to be messed up and eventually failing with errors like

       

      ActiveMQConnectionTimedOutException[errorType=CONNECTION_TIMEDOUT message=AMQ119014: Timed out after waiting 30,000 ms for response when sending packet 53]

       

      but also other packets like 43, 51 and 63.

       

      We have triple-checked that the way how we are sending the JMS messages is correct, such as creating the TopicConnection individually and closing it in a finally block (in a SLSB).

       

      In consequence, these broken connections stay in the pool that eventually contains only broken connections. To avoid that, we are applying this workaround: https://developer.jboss.org/message/975486#975486

      This however doesn't solve what seems to be the cause.

       

      For now we have resorted to using the unpooled connection factory "java:/ConnectionFactory" and since those connections don't participate in the transaction, we manually commit/rollback using CDI events.

      This solves the issue but of course it is just a hack.

       

      It appears as if under high load the connection pool sometimes hands out the same connection to two clients/threads. So far we have been unable to reproduce that, for example, we have sent millions of messages from several threads concurrently using the same SLSB used in production without a single error. It only happens at some high-load installations and normally only a few times per day, but in one installation it occurs so often that the system is almost unusable.

       

      Does anyone have an idea what the problem could be or a suggestion on how to reproduce it?

       

      Cheers,

      Torsten