Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0. The upgrade date is tentatively scheduled for 2 December 2018, pending final testing and feedback.
Bug 1340155 - 5.5 UI Worker Thread Leak while ordering a service
5.5 UI Worker Thread Leak while ordering a service
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Product: Red Hat CloudForms Management Engine
Classification: Red Hat
Component: Performance (Show other bugs)
5.5.0
Unspecified Unspecified
high Severity high
: GA
: 5.6.0
Assigned To: dmetzger
Alex Krzos
: ZStream
Depends On:
Blocks: 1342277 1342279
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2016-05-26 10:37 EDT by Alex Krzos
Modified: 2017-08-29 21:35 EDT (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version: 5.6.0.5
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
: 1342277 1342279 (view as bug list)
Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-06-29 12:06:05 EDT
Type: Bug
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)
Graph displaying Thread Count and Memory While ordering single item off service catalog (62.48 KB, image/png)
2016-05-26 10:58 EDT, Alex Krzos
no flags Details
Graph displaying thread count and memory after patch (58.97 KB, image/png)
2016-05-26 11:29 EDT, Alex Krzos
no flags Details


External Trackers
Tracker ID Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHBA-2016:1348 normal SHIPPED_LIVE CFME 5.6.0 bug fixes and enhancement update 2016-06-29 14:50:04 EDT

  None (edit)
Description Alex Krzos 2016-05-26 10:37:33 EDT
Description of problem:
Using a large database to replicate slow User Interface response timing while ordering a service I found that the UI Worker on 5.5 is leaking threads and growing in memory usage.

I ran through a simple scenario ordering a service 5 times in a row and the memory usage of the UIWorker shot from 355MiB RSS to 714MiB  during that time frame the number of threads grew from 21 to 111 for that worker.  Prior to that, I had ran through the scenario to "prime" any caches and that is most likely why the thread count was already 21 rather than the "typical" 3 threads I can see this worker has when initially started.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Tested on 5.5.4.0

How reproducible:
With this large scale database on 5.5.4.0 it is reproducible 

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Navigate to Services -> Catalog
2. Pick an item to order on the service catalog
3. Observe memory and thread count for UIWorker

Actual results:
Thread count grows by 5 when pressing the order button, memory of the work grew by ~24MiB during that time frame as well.

Thread count again grows after clicking on the request after pushing the submit button.  And further grows on pushing the little checkbox to then approve an order.  These further grow the worker by around 20MiB RSS memory as well.

Approving an order also grows memory ~1MiB RSS

Expected results:
Thread count to only temporarily grow if needed and for memory to be reclaimed 

Additional info:


Memory also appears to climb as text is added to the text dialogs for this service as well.  This does not appear to have any thread leakage though.
Comment 3 Alex Krzos 2016-05-26 10:58 EDT
Created attachment 1162036 [details]
Graph displaying Thread Count and Memory While ordering single item off service catalog
Comment 4 Alex Krzos 2016-05-26 11:28:40 EDT
This is related to this bug:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1321934

I tried the patch (8399) and the threads are not accumulating anymore

Furthermore memory usage levels off after 3-4 runs of ordering an item rather than continuing to grow
Comment 5 Alex Krzos 2016-05-26 11:29 EDT
Created attachment 1162066 [details]
Graph displaying thread count and memory after patch
Comment 9 errata-xmlrpc 2016-06-29 12:06:05 EDT
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2016:1348

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.