[seam-dev] Performance Review of current Seam trunk fo 2.1.1
Jay Balunas
tech4j at gmail.com
Fri Nov 14 10:52:25 EST 2008
Hi Guys,
Wanted to provide some more information based on our chat last night
about the debug settings. I verified that both 9017 and 9557 versions
of the wiki example I was running have debug=false.
I did this by logging the "DEBUG" level and found where both the seam
initialization, and the wiki initialization set its debug value. Both
were set to false.
Regards,
Jay
On Nov 12, 2008, at 10:38 PM, Jay Balunas wrote:
> By the way the goal is to eventually get these scripts and
> instructions into svn so that anyone can run them.
>
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 10:37 PM, Jay Balunas <tech4j at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> Shane,
>
> Here is my basic 25 user script for the wiki example. It does
> assume a page "wiki/Community/SeamUsers" exists for the testing and
> I am not certain if such a page exists by default in the wiki
> example. I have imported the live seamframework.org data from July
> 31st in my system. However the script is easy enough to modify with
> JMeter 2.3.2 and you should be able to change the page that will be
> accessed without a problem.
>
> If needed I can forward the instructions and data for that import,
> but it is not quick.
>
> Depending on what you find - tomorrow I will run the same test on
> the booking example and the dvd example to get some more data
> points. Let me know if you find anything or would like me to try
> something specific.
>
> Talk to you later,
> Jay
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 10:22 PM, Jay Balunas <tech4j at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> Yes when run under load (25 users) the system seems to becomes
> unresponsive. The requests do eventually return - jmeter was
> reporting an average request time of 100+ seconds. When accessed
> during the warm up requests (my manual requests to prime the
> application) the application functioned just fine.
>
> -Jay
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 8:20 PM, Shane Bryzak
> <shane.bryzak at jboss.com> wrote:
> Thanks Jay,
>
> Just to be clear, did you mean that each individual request is now
> taking 100+ seconds as compared to 3 seconds previously?
>
> Jay Balunas wrote:
> Performance Review of current Seam trunk fo 2.1.1
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> Working with the latest trunk from today (r9557) and testing the
> performance changes that were made. Previous tests were done with
> (r9017). Just as a refresher my baseline test uses the wiki example
> with all of the sfwk.org <http://sfwk.org> data up to July 31st 2008.
>
> For these tests I use JBoss AS 4.2.3 with JDK5 on my linux machine.
> Jmeter is used to load test and calculate the results and graphs. I
> then use JProfiler to to identify either blocking threads, call
> graphs, and CPU usage.
> Unfortunately the results were not good. I was using a mixture of
> 25 and 50 users - hitting the server 25 times each. As before they
> were accessing the first page of the user forum.
>
> With r9017 the 25 user x 25 requests averaged 3 seconds a request.
> With trunk they were 100+ seconds. Thinking something was wrong
> with the system I replaced the 9557 wiki.war with the 9017 and reran
> with all other variables the same. Again the 9017 saw about 3
> seconds for the average over the 625 requests.
>
> I then profiled the server under load as I did before. The methods
> below appear to be the primary offenders although as with most
> blocking threads there are some others waiting on the same monitor.
> I'll follow up this email with the stack traces, and more
> information from my investigation.
>
> -----------------------------------
> 1) com.arjuna.ats.jbossatx.jta.TransactionManagerDelegate.findLock(..)
> - This appears to be the biggest issue. Every requests are
> generating many of these calls.
> - http://viewvc.jboss.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/labs/labs/jbosstm/branches/JBOSSTS_4_2_3_GA_SP/atsintegration/classes/com/arjuna/ats/jbossatx/jta/TransactionManagerDelegate.java?view=markup
> - It looks like every interaction with any transaction causing
> synchronization issues with this call.
> - We'll need to find a way to limit these calls.
> - I'm guessing some of the changes made for JBSEAM-3519 may be the
> cause although I have not had time to look deeper.
> - See : http://fisheye.jboss.org/browse/Seam/trunk/src/main/org/jboss/seam/transaction/TransactionInterceptor.java?r1=8626&r2=9552&u=-1&ignore=&k=
> <http://fisheye.jboss.org/browse/Seam/trunk/src/main/org/jboss/seam/transaction/TransactionInterceptor.java?r1=8626&r2=9552&u=-1&ignore=&k=
> >
> http://fisheye.jboss.org/browse/Seam/trunk/src/main/org/jboss/seam/util/Work.java?r1=9221&r2=9550&u=-1&ignore=&k=
> <http://fisheye.jboss.org/browse/Seam/trunk/src/main/org/jboss/seam/util/Work.java?r1=9221&r2=9550&u=-1&ignore=&k=
> >
>
> -----------------------------------
> 2) org.jboss.naming.ENCFactory.getObjectInstance()
> javax.naming.Context.lookup(java.lang.String)
>
> This appears to be the second biggest offender and it looks like we
> are no longer blocking on retrieving the InitialContext, but now
> blocking on performing the lookups using the context.
> -----------------------------------
> 3)
> org
> .jboss
> .resource
> .connectionmanager.CachedConnectionManager.unregisterConnection()
>
> org
> .jboss
> .resource
> .connectionmanager.CachedConnectionManager.registerConnection()
>
> This is the third biggest issue, but much less than the others. 1
> or 2 dozen blocks on 60 requests. These are all related to
> hibernate calls and database access from what I've seen so far.
> -----------------------------------
> I'll follow up this email tomorrow with the typical stack traces
> seen for each of these.
>
> Shane could you review, and I'll get more information on these
> tomorrow.
> Thanks,
> -Jay
>
> --
> blog: http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Jay
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> seam-dev mailing list
> seam-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> blog: http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Jay
>
>
>
> --
> blog: http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Jay
>
>
>
> --
> blog: http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Jay
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/seam-dev/attachments/20081114/dcc18b73/attachment.html
More information about the seam-dev
mailing list