[jboss-dev] Interesting JBAS profiling results

Fri Jun 19 07:51:36 EDT 2009

For comparison, here are "all" numbers from my laptop  
http://pastebin.com/m21a0bdf5

"
LongRunningTasksThreadPool  3304
jboss.jca:name=DefaultDS,service=DataSourceBinding  9423
"


Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> I am running the default profile. I'll get the numbers for "all" 
> profile. I can then compare them against my numbers for the default 
> profile.
>
> On a related note, i guess using the default profile for testing the 
> performance would be a good idea because that's what most users are 
> interested in.
>
> P.S: Once the MC and other component upgrade happens in the trunk we 
> might see some different  (hopefully better) numbers.
>
> -Jaikiran
>
> Scott Marlow wrote:
>> Jaikiran,
>>
>> Are you running the default profile?  I am currently running "all" 
>> and seeing about 3.5 seconds for "LongRunningTasksThreadPool".
>>
>> Could you please try running with the "all" config and share how much 
>> time you see "LongRunningTasksThreadPool" taking to deploy?
>> Thank you!
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>>> The latest numbers (from my laptop) as of Wednesday night against AS 
>>> trunk are here http://pastebin.com/fc3a7ad0 (also attached is the 
>>> html version). The WARDeployer which in it's start() method just 
>>> does a web.xml parsing through JBossXB seems to be taking 713 milli 
>>> seconds which seems to be on a higher side. There are other things 
>>> like TransactionManager too which are taking time (probably because 
>>> the configuration file involves usage of @JMX which triggers AOP?).
>>>
>>> I also got the number of deployers per stage that are currently used 
>>> in AS trunk. The output is attached.
>>>
>>> -Jaikiran
>>>
>>>
>>> Scott Marlow wrote:
>>>> FYI,  http://pastebin.com/m7325e91f   contains a breakdown of how 
>>>> long each component took to deploy in milliseconds (with trunk 
>>>> source as of this morning).
>>>> Scott Marlow wrote:
>>>>> It might also be interesting to see what the total deployment time 
>>>>> is per bean and how that might relate to the timings below.  Do we 
>>>>> have a way to do that (maybe via an interceptor)?
>>>>>
>>>>> David M. Lloyd wrote:
>>>>>> I was talking to Jason G on the phone, and he had an interesting 
>>>>>> idea: what happens when we profile the AS and look at the results 
>>>>>> by package rather than method?  This should give us a rough idea, 
>>>>>> by project, of where our startup time is being spent.  So I took 
>>>>>> a couple minutes and did just that, with some interesting results.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> First, results for a minimal startup (results under 2% omitted):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 9.7% - 2,418 ms - 41,306 hot spot inv. org.jboss.aop.pointcut
>>>>>> 8.3% - 2,063 ms - 38,480 hot spot inv. 
>>>>>> org.jboss.reflect.plugins.introspection
>>>>>> 5.9% - 1,461 ms - 373,799 hot spot inv. org.jboss.aop
>>>>>> 5.7% - 1,415 ms - 52,528 hot spot inv. 
>>>>>> org.jboss.virtual.plugins.context.zip
>>>>>> 5.7% - 1,411 ms - 294,922 hot spot inv. 
>>>>>> org.jboss.virtual.plugins.context
>>>>>> 5.0% - 1,245 ms - 672,024 hot spot inv. org.jboss.aop.pointcut.ast
>>>>>> 3.6% - 893 ms - 7,928 hot spot inv. org.jboss.classloader.spi.base
>>>>>> 3.0% - 735 ms - 17,241 hot spot inv. org.jboss.dependency.plugins
>>>>>> 2.9% - 720 ms - 20,215 hot spot inv. org.jboss.aop.util
>>>>>> 2.8% - 697 ms - 150,242 hot spot inv. org.apache.log4j
>>>>>> 2.6% - 636 ms - 272,879 hot spot inv. org.jboss.reflect.plugins
>>>>>> 2.2% - 550 ms - 72,341 hot spot inv. 
>>>>>> org.jboss.metadata.plugins.context
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As you can see, a minimal startup is dominated by AOP with VFS 
>>>>>> being a not-so-close second.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Next, a default startup, which shows somewhat different behavior:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 10.5% - 25,156 ms - 5,827,279 hot spot inv. 
>>>>>> org.jboss.virtual.plugins.context
>>>>>> 8.5% - 20,320 ms - 1,232,357 hot spot inv. 
>>>>>> org.jboss.virtual.plugins.context.zip
>>>>>> 6.6% - 15,822 ms - 1,054,169 hot spot inv. 
>>>>>> org.jboss.virtual.plugins.vfs.helpers
>>>>>> 6.4% - 15,319 ms - 297,465 hot spot inv. org.jboss.aop.pointcut
>>>>>> 5.9% - 14,256 ms - 237,457 hot spot inv. 
>>>>>> org.jboss.dependency.plugins
>>>>>> 5.1% - 12,148 ms - 6,769,258 hot spot inv. 
>>>>>> org.jboss.metadata.spi.scope
>>>>>> 4.7% - 11,254 ms - 72,717 hot spot inv. javassist.bytecode
>>>>>> 4.2% - 10,132 ms - 8,205,516 hot spot inv. org.jboss.dependency.spi
>>>>>> 3.5% - 8,426 ms - 2,308,354 hot spot inv. org.jboss.aop
>>>>>> 3.2% - 7,713 ms - 4,109,176 hot spot inv. org.jboss.aop.pointcut.ast
>>>>>> 2.7% - 6,575 ms - 182,581 hot spot inv. 
>>>>>> org.jboss.reflect.plugins.introspection
>>>>>> 2.7% - 6,366 ms - 52,818 hot spot inv. 
>>>>>> org.jboss.classloader.spi.base
>>>>>> 2.2% - 5,284 ms - 333,613 hot spot inv. org.jboss.mx.server
>>>>>>
>>>>>> VFS, AOP, metadata, classloading.  If I separate out filtered 
>>>>>> classes, it's basically the same story:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 17.4% - 42,348 ms - 53,786,066 hot spot inv. java.lang
>>>>>> 8.4% - 20,408 ms - 5,827,335 hot spot inv. 
>>>>>> org.jboss.virtual.plugins.context
>>>>>> 8.2% - 19,943 ms - 21,005,518 hot spot inv. java.util
>>>>>> 5.6% - 13,706 ms - 1,232,359 hot spot inv. 
>>>>>> org.jboss.virtual.plugins.context.zip
>>>>>> 4.5% - 11,068 ms - 297,465 hot spot inv. org.jboss.aop.pointcut
>>>>>> 3.5% - 8,531 ms - 72,717 hot spot inv. javassist.bytecode
>>>>>> 3.4% - 8,266 ms - 6,769,258 hot spot inv. 
>>>>>> org.jboss.metadata.spi.scope
>>>>>> 3.3% - 8,106 ms - 1,054,287 hot spot inv. 
>>>>>> org.jboss.virtual.plugins.vfs.helpers
>>>>>> 3.2% - 7,754 ms - 237,461 hot spot inv. org.jboss.dependency.plugins
>>>>>> 2.8% - 6,787 ms - 8,205,588 hot spot inv. org.jboss.dependency.spi
>>>>>> 2.4% - 5,964 ms - 2,308,354 hot spot inv. org.jboss.aop
>>>>>> 2.3% - 5,524 ms - 52,818 hot spot inv. 
>>>>>> org.jboss.classloader.spi.base
>>>>>> 2.2% - 5,316 ms - 4,109,176 hot spot inv. org.jboss.aop.pointcut.ast
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So it looks to me like we ought to be focusing our optimization 
>>>>>> efforts on VFS and AOP, maybe classloading as well.  I encourage 
>>>>>> folks to play around with profiling this way; it's fairly 
>>>>>> illuminating.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - DML
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> jboss-development mailing list
>>>>>> jboss-development at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> jboss-development mailing list
>>>> jboss-development at lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development
>>>
>>
>