Tracing is pretty useless at identifying slow parts, as the overhead it adds distorts the profile too much. The only thing it is really good for is identifying methods that are called too often.
Sampling is generally much better.
Stuart
Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
What kind of information do you need? I was unable to get YourKit to
dump a .snapshot file for some reason. If that's what you need, I can
try again. Which profile mode? This was done using tracing.
Thanks!
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Stuart Douglas<stuart.w.douglas@gmail.com <mailto:stuart.w.douglas@gmail.com>> wrote:
The screenshot does not really tell us much. We would need to see
the actual profile information.
Stuart
Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
Hi Jozef, Stuart, and Weld-devs,
In Forge 2 we are using Weld extensively, and one of the things
we do is
start up many instances simultaneously.
We may have anywhere from one to one-hundred or more weld instances.
Currently we have only seen around 10-12 instances, and
performance is
"Okay", but in theory, we could see hundreds of instances, at which
point, performance starts to be a concern. We're working around this
problem by disabling CDI support on some internal addons, but...
it's
not really reasonable to expect that everyone will do this.
Which means... we need to figure out how to shave as much time
off the
bootstrap as possible. Currently each weld instance takes
anywhere from
80ms to 450ms to start (not really sure why such variation yet,) and
we'd hopefully like to get that down even lower, around 10-20ms.
Classloading time only would be optimal, but obviously difficult
to achieve.
How can we get the most speed out of Weld? Most of our
deployments have
only ~15 bean classes at most. It seems like a lot of time
(~30-40%) is
being spent in the Google concurrent collections.
(Screenshot attached.)
Thanks,
--
Lincoln Baxter, III
http://ocpsoft.org
"Simpler is better."
--
Lincoln Baxter, III
http://ocpsoft.org
"Simpler is better."