Re: BizTalk 2004 SOAP Adapter Tuning, ThreadPool

From: Matt Milner (matt.milner_at_m3technologypartners)
Date: 09/07/04 

Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 10:33:27 -0500

have you changed the settings in your <system.net><connectionManagement>
section in the machine.config file to allow more than 2 connections
outbound? I'm not sure it is related, but could ease some of your pain in
terms of threading and throughput.

Matt

"Markus" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:042e01c493e7$9d8c42c0$a401280a@phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> First of all, your answer is assuming that we have control
> over the web service host. We dont have control over
> either the web service or the host, this is 3 party.
>
> The problem is actually as simple as this:
> I have a scenario where a large file is split into
> multiple messages
> (200-700 x) all going to a web service (3 party). The soap
> adaper fails
> with this error:
>
> The "SOAP" adapter is suspending an outbound message going
> to destination
> URL:"http://cuk497:8500/axis/services/DataLoaderWS".
> Details:"There were not enough free threads in the
> ThreadPool object to
> complete the operation. ".
>
> Note the following: this is not a timeout issue, nor a
> problem with the remote web service.
>
> I have tuned and changed the values in the mngt service
> table with
> watermarks etc, and the machine.config connections. And
> this partly
> solve the problem. I am able to eliminate the problem by
> this approach,
> BUT i dont believe it is the right way of doing it, and it
> dont scale at
> all. I think this is a bug, are you of a different
> opinion? or do you
> have any suggestion on how to approach this?
>
> Regards,
> Markus
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >You are describing more than one issue so I'll try to
> answer one by one.
> >
> >1.>> queued requests in IIS actually going through
> successfully over an
> >hour later, even though the message was retried right up
> to its retry count
> >and written to disc via its backup transport -
> >Where do you send the messages? It looks to me that the
> receiving web
> >service performs a long running operation (let's say over
> 2 minutes) and as
> >a result the connection is timing out. Could you confirm
> my assumption? If
> >this is the case then it might be a design problem in
> your web service. You
> >should be able to workaround this. Basically what is
> happening right now is
> >- BizTalk sends the message, your web service executes
> the request and it
> >takes a long time, let's say 5 minutes. As a result the
> HTTP connection is
> >dropped so BizTalk will retry sending the message. So you
> will have a
> >second, third, ..., request all executing the same web
> service operation.
> >If your web service is not designed correctly, this could
> lead to IIS
> >requests to be queued.
> >
> >What's the solution? Ideally, you should improve your web
> service so that
> >it executes the request in just a few seconds so you
> don't have this
> >problem. If that's not possible, then you need to change
> the default
> >timeout settings so that the HTTP connection does not
> timeout before the
> >request ends execution. To do this, you need to probably
> need to make
> >changes to the following
> >
> >Required changes
> >================
> > - on the web service machine - "Connection Timeout"
> web site property
> >for the IIS web site where your web service is installed
> (by default 120
> >seconds)
> > - on the BizTalk machine - If you are calling a web
> service from an
> >orchestration and need to increase the timeout, you can
> do so by setting a
> >context property on your outbound message in a message
> assignment shape
> >before sending.
> > MyMessage
> (SOAP.ClientConnectionTimeout) = 240; //
> >your value here
> >
> >Other things to look into
> >====================
> >The required changes above should do it. If not you can
> look further into
> >the options below.
> > - on the web service machine - <processModel
> >responseDeadlockInterval="????"> (setting per machine)
> > - on the web service machine - <httpRuntime
> executionTimeout="????"/>
> >under <system.web> (setting per application)
> > - on the web service machine - Server.ScriptTimeout
> (probably it doesn't
> >make sense. I think it's only for scritps)
> > - on the BizTalk machine that runs the host used by
> SOAP-
> ><system.net><connectionManagement><add name="*"
> maxconnection= "15"
> >(default value is 2)
> >
> >2. >> threadpool issues causing retries
> > Hopefully the changes above will eliminate all the
> unnecessary retries
> >so you won't run into threadpool issues. If you still run
> into thread pool
> >issues then what you should use multiple hosts or host
> instances and spread
> >your SOAP and HTTP requests over these multiple hosts or
> host instances.
> >
> >3. >> Is the SOAP adapter not designed to handle this
> amount of requests?
> >If so surely it cannot be considered even remotely
> scalable in an
> >enterprise messaging solution
> >It should be able to do so. It looks like a problem with
> the web service.
> >
> >--------------------
> >>>Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
> >>>From: "Markus" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com>
> >>>Sender: "Markus" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com>
> >>>Subject: BizTalk 2004 SOAP Adapter Tuning, ThreadPool
> >>>Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 05:10:11 -0700
> >>>Lines: 49
> >>>Message-ID: <09c601c490e5$cb8cf660$a401280a@phx.gbl>
> >>>MIME-Version: 1.0
> >>>Content-Type: text/plain;
> >>> charset="iso-8859-1"
> >>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >>>X-Newsreader: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000
> >>>thread-index: AcSQ5cuMpntfxDpiSbKQVnHT7MClPg==
> >>>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300
> >>>Newsgroups: microsoft.public.biztalk.general
> >>>Path: cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl
> >>>Xref: cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl
> microsoft.public.biztalk.general:19300
> >>>NNTP-Posting-Host: tk2msftngxa12.phx.gbl 10.40.1.164
> >>>X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.biztalk.general
> >>>
> >>>Hi,
> >>>I am having the same problem as Conor. Does anyone have
> >>>any experience with this?
> >>>
> >>>/////////////////
> >>>
> >>>Hi,
> >>>
> >>>Can anyone point me to a Tuning guide related
> specifically
> >>>to the SOAP
> >>>Adapter and a Web Service that it calls. I'm
> experiencing
> >>>serious
> >>>scalability issues with a system that is not far off
> going
> >>>live.
> >>>
> >>>I would've assumed BizTalk can handle 500 messages
> posted
> >>>to messagebox, and
> >>>could deliver these to a Web Service via an
> Orchestration
> >>>and the SOAP
> >>>adapter in a timely and reliable fashion. However I'm
> >>>experiencing numerous
> >>>threadpool issues causing retries, queued requests in
> IIS
> >>>actually going
> >>>through successfully over an hour later, even though
> the
> >>>message was retried
> >>>right up to its retry count and written to disc via its
> >>>backup transport -
> >>>i.e. BizTalk being told that it's deliver failed, even
> >>>though the Web
> >>>Service done its work perfectly with no errors. Very
> very
> >>>confusing stuff.
> >>>
> >>>Is the SOAP adapter not designed to handle this amount
> of
> >>>requests? If so
> >>>surely it cannot be considered even remotely scalable
> in
> >>>an enterprise
> >>>messaging solution.
> >>>
> >>>Is it possible for me to increase the SOAP hosts worker
> >>>threads easily? And
> >>>should I be considering throttling IIS request handling?
> >>>
> >>>Thanks in advance,
> >>>Conor
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
> confers no rights.
> >
> >EBusiness Server Team
> >
> >.
> >

Relevant Pages

  • Re: An existing connection was forcibly closed by the remote host
    ... Within my web service proxy class I overrode the GetWebRequestmethod and modified it as shown below. ... HttpWebRequest request = base.GetWebRequestas ... If the size of the request message I was using is greater than the size of the packets the host could receive and the host is configured receive chunked messages then I guess I can assume when we sent a message larger than the packet size without sending it chunked their server terminated the session because it was waiting for another TCP message??? ... at System.Net.Sockets.NetworkStream.Read(Bytebuffer, Int32 offset, Int32 size) ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet.webservices)
  • ASP.Net calling SSL Web Service (PayPal) fails: "Could not establish secure channel for SSL/TLS
    ... Localhost is a Windows Server 2003 with the June 2003 Hotfix Rollup. ... I am attempting to call a PayPal Web Service. ... Web Exception: System.Net.WebException: The underlying connection was ... I repeated the failing request and checked the "System" section in the ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet.webservices)
  • Re: BizTalk 2004 SOAP Adapter Tuning, ThreadPool
    ... We dont have control over ... >> either the web service or the host, ... >> HTTP connection is ...
    (microsoft.public.biztalk.general)
  • Re: An existing connection was forcibly closed by the remote host
    ... HttpWebRequest request = base.GetWebRequestas ... the host could receive and the host is configured receive chunked messages ... System.Net.WebException: The underlying connection was closed: An unexpected error occurred on a receive. ... at System.Net.Sockets.NetworkStream.Read(Bytebuffer, Int32 offset, Int32 size) ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet.webservices)
  • RE: BizTalk 2004 SOAP Adapter Tuning, ThreadPool
    ... either the web service or the host, ... BUT i dont believe it is the right way of doing it, ... >second, third, ..., request all executing the same web ...
    (microsoft.public.biztalk.general)
Loading