Entity Engine Performance
Locked
 
|
Hi all,
we are currently testing our OFBiz-project on several platforms. The Entity Engine Performance Test from Webtools is up to now the only performance test we're doing, everything else is measured "how it feels". ;) OFBiz runs fine with all platforms (Windows XP, Linux i386, Linux AMD64) with J2SE 1.5 from Sun. We could not encounter any platform-specific problems. :) This evening I will test running OFBiz on Solaris 10 with J2SE 1.5 again, but I don't think there will be any problem. Pure Java rocks. :) BTW: Has anybody any ideas what perfomance tests could else be done? We want to stress OFBiz and I think the best ideas for stressing have the developers. :) So, back to the problem: We have OFBiz running on an two-way Opteron 265 (Dual-core, there are four physical processors) with 4 GB of RAM, the operating system is Linux (2.6.8). PostgreSQL 8.1 runs on this machine as our database. All works fine, but the Entity Engine Performance Test shows us poor results compared to other systems we have tested. Running the test on a Windows XP-box (2.8 GHz Celeron, 2 GB RAM) with PostgreSQL on the same machine is much faster. Those results are shoking us. We thought the Opteron-machine would blame the other hosts... The configuration of the test scenarios in detail (in all scenarios a version of OFBiz from trunk was used): Test 1: Opteron 265 (Dual-Core, two-way, four physical CPUs), 4 GB RAM, U320-SCSI RAID1, Debian Sarge (Linux 2.6.8, i386), PostgreSQL 8.1 (on the same host), Java 1.5.0_06 Results: http://www.der-moloch.de/files/ofbiz-ml/entityengine_opteron.png Test 2: 2.8 GHz Celeron, 2 GB RAM, single IDE-drive, Windows XP, PostgreSQL 8.1 (on the same host), Java 1.5.0_06 Results: http://www.der-moloch.de/files/ofbiz-ml/entityengine-windows.png Test 3: OFBiz on an Athlon X2 4200+ (two physical cpus), 2 GB RAM, single SATA-drive, Debian Sid (Linux 2.6.17.13, AMD64), PostgreSQL 8.1 (see below), Java 1.5.0_08 PostgreSQL 8.1 on a Sun Ultra 5 (USIIi 400 MHz), 512 MB RAM, single UW-SCSI-drive, Ubuntu Dapper (Linux 2.6.17.11) Results: http://www.der-moloch.de/files/ofbiz-ml/entityengine_ultra5.png On all machines there were no bigger jobs during the tests and no other users were using OFBiz. On all machines the except the Windows host build 405 and 407 of the PostgreSQL JDBC3-driver were tested (with the same results). We have even tried to optimized the PostgreSQL configuration on the Opteron but this had no effect. All other test scenarios blame our Opteron... We think the problem is not PostgreSQL, because we've tried different configuration options and the postmaster processes on the Opteron are just idling around. Has anybody an idea what we could do? Do you need more information? TIA Best regards, Fabian. |
|
|
> We think the problem is not PostgreSQL, because we've tried different
> configuration options and the postmaster processes on the Opteron are just > idling around. Has anybody an idea what we could do? Do you need more > information? Have you run actual postgresql performance tests on each one to be sure you can eliminate that possibility? -- David N. Welton - http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/ Linux, Open Source Consulting - http://www.dedasys.com/ |
|
|
Hi David,
> Have you run actual postgresql performance tests on each one to be > sure you can eliminate that possibility? up to now I haven't done that. Do you have a link for me in order to be sure to run the test you mean? TIA Best regards, Fabian. |
|
|
In reply to this post by Fabian Gorsler
Fabian Gorsler wrote:
> Hi all, > > we are currently testing our OFBiz-project on several platforms. The > Entity Engine Performance Test from Webtools is up to now the only > performance test we're doing, everything else is measured "how it feels". > ;) We're just getting started with the framework, and I spent what amounts to chasing my tail for several weeks working on this issue last month. We've seen our best performance in using CentOS 4.4 (which is basically RHEL) and JDK 1.4.12. and running MySQL separately on a FreeBSD server. While we have successfully tested with Java5, if you read between the lines, Java5 is considerably slower than the upcoming Java6. I spent two day fiddling with OpenSolaris and OfBiz, and had errors tossed just with a clean install and ant run-install. Hope you have better luck with Solaris than I did. The hardware might have been the culprit, but I finally had to settle on something I knew we could admin. -- Walter |
|
|
In reply to this post by Fabian Gorsler
> up to now I haven't done that. Do you have a link for me in order to be
> sure to run the test you mean? TIA I don't have anything specific, unfortunately, it was just a general suggestion. -- David N. Welton - http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/ Linux, Open Source Consulting - http://www.dedasys.com/ |
|
|
In reply to this post by Walter Vaughan
Hi Walter,
> We've seen our best performance in using CentOS 4.4 (which is basically > RHEL) and JDK 1.4.12. and running MySQL separately on a FreeBSD server. thanks for the information. Do you have any idea where the problem comes from? Could you tell me which kernel, glibc and machine configuration you have used to use on your CentOS-machine? Perhaps we can track this issue down a little bit. > While we have successfully tested with Java5, if you read between the > lines, Java5 is considerably slower than the upcoming Java6. Up to now I haven't spend much time on Java 6. Thanks for the advice. > I spent two day fiddling with OpenSolaris and OfBiz, and had errors tossed > just with a clean install and ant run-install. Hope you have better luck > with Solaris than I did. I have already had OFBiz running on a Solaris 10/Sparc host and there were no problems with J2SE 1.5. Did you run OFBiz with OpenSolaris on x86 or Sparc? Best regards, Fabian Gorsler. |
|
|
In reply to this post by davidnwelton
Hi David,
> I don't have anything specific, unfortunately, it was just a general > suggestion. ok, I'll look out if I find a nice SQL file for further tests. But on the Opteron another, about 2.5 GB big, database runs with PostgreSQL without any performance problems and because of that I think everything is fine with the database. Thanks for your answer. Best regards, Fabian. |
Re: Entity Engine Performance
|
|
In reply to this post by Fabian Gorsler
In general the entity engine performance test page in webtools is not a good predictor for web site performance because it is not really similar in any way to what happens in real-world use of an application. It only runs in a single thread (so multiple processors won't help much), it does a bunch of pretty bogus, repetitive data operations with no presentation, which is also very different from real application usage. The best thing to do is have a separate box (or a number of separate boxes...) run something like JMeter to do page requests and sessions that are similar to real world usage. There are various open source and commercial tools for this and for any performance test this is the only way to go. If you plan on having any sort of load on your servers doing this sort of thing should be considered necessary. If you find performance problems explaining and fixing them requires a lot of knowledge, basically about every piece of software and hardware involved. With a bit of optimization you can often dramatically improve results though... -David On Sep 11, 2006, at 6:33 AM, Fabian Gorsler wrote: > Hi all, > > we are currently testing our OFBiz-project on several platforms. The > Entity Engine Performance Test from Webtools is up to now the only > performance test we're doing, everything else is measured "how it > feels". > ;) > > OFBiz runs fine with all platforms (Windows XP, Linux i386, Linux > AMD64) > with J2SE 1.5 from Sun. We could not encounter any platform-specific > problems. :) This evening I will test running OFBiz on Solaris 10 with > J2SE 1.5 again, but I don't think there will be any problem. Pure Java > rocks. :) > > BTW: Has anybody any ideas what perfomance tests could else be > done? We > want to stress OFBiz and I think the best ideas for stressing have the > developers. :) > > So, back to the problem: We have OFBiz running on an two-way > Opteron 265 > (Dual-core, there are four physical processors) with 4 GB of RAM, the > operating system is Linux (2.6.8). PostgreSQL 8.1 runs on this > machine as > our database. All works fine, but the Entity Engine Performance > Test shows > us poor results compared to other systems we have tested. Running > the test > on a Windows XP-box (2.8 GHz Celeron, 2 GB RAM) with PostgreSQL on the > same machine is much faster. Those results are shoking us. We > thought the > Opteron-machine would blame the other hosts... > > The configuration of the test scenarios in detail (in all scenarios a > version of OFBiz from trunk was used): > > Test 1: > Opteron 265 (Dual-Core, two-way, four physical CPUs), 4 GB RAM, > U320-SCSI > RAID1, Debian Sarge (Linux 2.6.8, i386), PostgreSQL 8.1 (on the same > host), Java 1.5.0_06 > Results: http://www.der-moloch.de/files/ofbiz-ml/ > entityengine_opteron.png > > Test 2: > 2.8 GHz Celeron, 2 GB RAM, single IDE-drive, Windows XP, PostgreSQL > 8.1 > (on the same host), Java 1.5.0_06 > Results: http://www.der-moloch.de/files/ofbiz-ml/entityengine- > windows.png > > Test 3: > OFBiz on an Athlon X2 4200+ (two physical cpus), 2 GB RAM, single > SATA-drive, Debian Sid (Linux 2.6.17.13, AMD64), PostgreSQL 8.1 (see > below), Java 1.5.0_08 > PostgreSQL 8.1 on a Sun Ultra 5 (USIIi 400 MHz), 512 MB RAM, single > UW-SCSI-drive, Ubuntu Dapper (Linux 2.6.17.11) > Results: http://www.der-moloch.de/files/ofbiz-ml/ > entityengine_ultra5.png > > On all machines there were no bigger jobs during the tests and no > other > users were using OFBiz. On all machines the except the Windows host > build > 405 and 407 of the PostgreSQL JDBC3-driver were tested (with the same > results). We have even tried to optimized the PostgreSQL > configuration on > the Opteron but this had no effect. All other test scenarios blame our > Opteron... > > We think the problem is not PostgreSQL, because we've tried different > configuration options and the postmaster processes on the Opteron > are just > idling around. Has anybody an idea what we could do? Do you need more > information? > > TIA > > Best regards, > Fabian. > |
|
|
Hi David,
> In general the entity engine performance test page in webtools is not > a good predictor for web site performance because it is not really > similar in any way to what happens in real-world use of an > application. that's totally correct, but we just wanted to see anything on how OFBiz performs. At least we know now, that something is strange with that machine, because creating instances of e.g. HashMaps is slower and it seems to be that each method call on this machine takes more time than on other environments. Perhaps we should upgrade the JVM. We'll see. > The best thing to do is have a separate box (or a number of separate > boxes...) run something like JMeter to do page requests and sessions > that are similar to real world usage. There are various open source > and commercial tools for this and for any performance test this is > the only way to go. Yes, that is our current plan. Yesterday I've read a bit about The Grinder, which was proposed on this list a few days ago, and today I want to try it. > If you plan on having any sort of load on your servers doing this > sort of thing should be considered necessary. If you find performance > problems explaining and fixing them requires a lot of knowledge, > basically about every piece of software and hardware involved. With a > bit of optimization you can often dramatically improve results though... Exactly that's the point why I've posted the issue to this list. I hope I'll find the problem. If I can say I've found it, I'll post my results. Thanks for your answer. Best regards, Fabian. |
OFBiz (today's trunk version) on Solaris 10/Sparc (was: Re: Entity Engine Performance)
|
|
In reply to this post by Walter Vaughan
Hi Walter,
Hi list, here are the results from ant run-install-seed (I've modificated build.xml in order to let run-install-seed depend on run-install.) and ant run-tests. I've used Derby as database. Machine (uname -a): SunOS sunny 5.10 Generic_118833-17 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-60 JVM (java -version): java version "1.5.0_06" Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.5.0_06-b05) Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 1.5.0_06-b05, mixed mode, sharing) Logs: http://www.der-moloch.de/files/ofbiz-ml/20060912-log-install_seed.txt http://www.der-moloch.de/files/ofbiz-ml/20060912-log-run_tests.txt I don't know whether a Solaris-machine is used for tests of OFBiz, but if you'd like, I'll write a script for perfoming those tests weekly or monthly on the trunk-version and posting them to this list. What do you think? HTH Best regards, Fabian. |
Re: OFBiz (today's trunk version) on Solaris 10/Sparc
|
|
Hi Fabian,
Fabian Gorsler wrote: > > I don't know whether a Solaris-machine is used for tests of OFBiz, but if > you'd like, I'll write a script for perfoming those tests weekly or > monthly on the trunk-version and posting them to this list. What do you > think? > It would be great! +1 Thanks Jacopo > HTH > > Best regards, > Fabian. > |
Re: OFBiz (today's trunk version) on Solaris 10/Sparc
|
|
Hi Jacopo,
> It would be great! > +1 ok, I'll write the script this weekend and automatic testing will be done each sunday. Best regards, Fabian. |
Re: OFBiz (today's trunk version) on Solaris 10/Sparc
|
|
Hi all,
the script is ready. I had some spare time on work. ;) Please tell me, whether the output is ok. The output will be send to ofbiz-dev by the script. If anyone else would like to run those builds, I'll send the script (ask by mail, e.g.) or I could upload it to the wiki. The script is a bash-skript, which uses sendmail to compose the email and scp for uploading the log files. ----------- *snip* Hi OFBiz Dev, this is the script for testing Apache OFBiz automatically. If you see any strange errors, please reply to this email or post the issue to this list, thank you very much. If you want to use this script on your own for testing Apache OFBiz, feel free to ask me for it. ------------------------------ The script was run on: SunOS moloch-05.moloch-rz 5.10 Generic_118833-17 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-60 Installed JDK: java version "1.5.0_06" Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.5.0_06-b05) Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 1.5.0_06-b05, mixed mode, sharing) Starting time was: Tue Sep 12 17:26:06 CEST 2006 ------------------------------ Starting SVN Update... success Starting refresh... success Starting run-install-seed... success Starting run-tests... success ------------------------------ End time was: Tue Sep 12 18:02:23 CEST 2006 The log files are availiable here: http://www.der-moloch.de/files/ofbiz-ml/build-logs/2006-09-12_refresh.log.gz http://www.der-moloch.de/files/ofbiz-ml/build-logs/2006-09-12_run-install-seed.log.gz http://www.der-moloch.de/files/ofbiz-ml/build-logs/2006-09-12_run-tests.log.gz http://www.der-moloch.de/files/ofbiz-ml/build-logs/2006-09-12_svn.log.gz ------------------------------ Best regards, Fabian Gorsler. ----------- Pasted Best regards, Fabian Gorsler. |
|
|
In reply to this post by Fabian Gorsler
Hi.
well, on Friday I did a new run and the results were as expected. Nothing has been altered - perhaps the server needed some time to reach operating temperature. ;) The result: http://www.der-moloch.de/files/ofbiz-ml/entity_opteron_good.png Thanks for all your replies and have a nice weekend. Best regards, Fabian. |
Re: Entity Engine Performance
|
|
In reply to this post by Fabian Gorsler
I did do JMeter performance tests http://www.nabble.com/Ofbiz-caching---JMeter-Performance-results-on-Ofbiz-eCommerce-store-tf2290974.html
There is a correction to the thread, we are using the following hardware: dual Opteron 248. Cent OS, The OS is 64bits, 4 GB RAM and U320 SCSIs, JVM - 1.4.2_08 The database server is mysql 5.0 I am still chasing the performance problem for our Ofbiz server. I am assuming the benchmark test results for such hardware are not upto expectations. If anyone has any specific suggestions, it would be of great help. In the cache management tool, I see the following (this is random observation, and not particularly after the tests): entitycache.entity-list.default.PartyAndUserLogin 0 0 57/57/0/0 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.PartyMailer 35 40 77/73/0/4 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.PartyProductInfo 2 0 3/3/0/0 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProdCatalogCategory 1 5,443 31/16/0/15 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProdCatalogRole 20 14 41/40/0/1 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.Product 0 156 1,403/1,403/0/0 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductAndCategoryAndAttribute 1 456 1,693/1,693/0/0 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductAndProductAttribute 1 3,162 3,430/3,430/0/0 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductAssoc 962 10,602 5,331/3,630/0/1,701 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductAttribute 10 40 199/179/0/20 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductCategory 0 46 95/95/0/0 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductCategoryDigiContentType 0 1 59/59/0/0 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductCategoryMember 451 484 1,894/1,400/0/494 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductCategoryRollup 6 1,708 71/41/0/30 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductContent 2,026 887 7,805/5,932/0/1,873 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductDetailAndProductCategory 0 30 919/919/0/0 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductDigitalContent 2 8 13/8/0/5 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductDigitalContentType 1 11 9/5/0/4 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductFeatureAndAppl 479 707 2,660/1,810/0/850 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductPrice 1,562 12,862 11,646/7,386/0/4,260 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductPriceType 1 0 3/3/0/0 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductReview 1,560 12,370 11,630/7,376/0/4,254 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductStoreCatalog 1 4,036 8/5/0/3 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductStoreGroup 1 0 3/3/0/0 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductStorePromoAppl 1 349 89/45/0/44 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductStoreSurveyAppl 2 6,459 40/22/0/18 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductType 1 12 39/20/0/19 entitycache.entity.default.Product 1,417 32,876 7,342/3,517/0/3,825 2,085/29 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity.default.ProductAttribute 16 5,472 215/15/0/200 0/41 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity.default.ProductCategory 59 20,837 814/58/0/756 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear entitycache.entity.default.ProductFacility 1,560 16,622 1,561/1,561/0/0 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear Thanks, Vijay.
|
Re: Entity Engine Performance
|
|
The entitycache information is nice and all, but to isolate a problem like this a lot more information is needed. You could try sending it here and see if people will comment, but you might have more success reading comments about performance and understanding the various factors and then you'll be able to see the problem(s) as you're looking into things. For the cache: the more important ones are the configuration and source caches, like ftl and bsh files, and the various widgets and so on. -David On Sep 19, 2006, at 11:46 AM, Vijay Korimilli wrote: > > I did do JMeter performance tests > http://www.nabble.com/Ofbiz-caching---JMeter-Performance-results-on- > Ofbiz-eCommerce-store-tf2290974.html > There is a correction to the thread, we are using the following > hardware: > dual Opteron 248. Cent OS, The OS is 64bits, 4 GB RAM and U320 > SCSIs, JVM - > 1.4.2_08 > The database server is mysql 5.0 > > I am still chasing the performance problem for our Ofbiz server. I am > assuming the benchmark test results for such hardware are not upto > expectations. > > If anyone has any specific suggestions, it would be of great help. > > In the cache management tool, I see the following (this is random > observation, and not particularly after the tests): > entitycache.entity-list.default.PartyAndUserLogin 0 0 57/57/0/0 0/0 > 0 0 true > Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.PartyMailer 35 40 77/73/0/4 0/0 0 0 > true > Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.PartyProductInfo 2 0 3/3/0/0 0/0 0 > 0 true > Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProdCatalogCategory 1 5,443 > 31/16/0/15 0/0 0 > 0 true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProdCatalogRole 20 14 41/40/0/1 0/0 > 0 0 true > Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.Product 0 156 1,403/1,403/0/0 0/0 0 > 0 true > Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductAndCategoryAndAttribute 1 456 > 1,693/1,693/0/0 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductAndProductAttribute 1 3,162 > 3,430/3,430/0/0 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductAssoc 962 10,602 > 5,331/3,630/0/1,701 > 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductAttribute 10 40 199/179/0/20 > 0/0 0 0 > true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductCategory 0 46 95/95/0/0 0/0 > 0 0 true > Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductCategoryDigiContentType 0 1 > 59/59/0/0 > 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductCategoryMember 451 484 > 1,894/1,400/0/494 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductCategoryRollup 6 1,708 > 71/41/0/30 0/0 > 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductContent 2,026 887 > 7,805/5,932/0/1,873 > 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductDetailAndProductCategory 0 30 > 919/919/0/0 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductDigitalContent 2 8 13/8/0/5 > 0/0 0 0 > true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductDigitalContentType 1 11 > 9/5/0/4 0/0 0 > 0 true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductFeatureAndAppl 479 707 > 2,660/1,810/0/850 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductPrice 1,562 12,862 > 11,646/7,386/0/4,260 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductPriceType 1 0 3/3/0/0 0/0 0 > 0 true > Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductReview 1,560 12,370 > 11,630/7,376/0/4,254 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductStoreCatalog 1 4,036 8/5/0/3 > 0/0 0 0 > true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductStoreGroup 1 0 3/3/0/0 0/0 0 > 0 true > Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductStorePromoAppl 1 349 > 89/45/0/44 0/0 0 > 0 true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductStoreSurveyAppl 2 6,459 > 40/22/0/18 > 0/0 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity-list.default.ProductType 1 12 39/20/0/19 > entitycache.entity.default.Product 1,417 32,876 7,342/3,517/0/3,825 > 2,085/29 > 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity.default.ProductAttribute 16 5,472 215/15/0/200 > 0/41 0 0 > true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity.default.ProductCategory 59 20,837 814/58/0/756 > 0/0 0 0 > true Elements Edit Clear > entitycache.entity.default.ProductFacility 1,560 16,622 > 1,561/1,561/0/0 0/0 > 0 0 true Elements Edit Clear > > > Thanks, > Vijay. > > > > > Fabian Gorsler wrote: >> >> Hi David, >> >> >>> In general the entity engine performance test page in webtools is >>> not >>> a good predictor for web site performance because it is not really >>> similar in any way to what happens in real-world use of an >>> application. >> >> that's totally correct, but we just wanted to see anything on how >> OFBiz >> performs. At least we know now, that something is strange with that >> machine, because creating instances of e.g. HashMaps is slower and it >> seems to be that each method call on this machine takes more time >> than on >> other environments. Perhaps we should upgrade the JVM. We'll see. >> >>> The best thing to do is have a separate box (or a number of separate >>> boxes...) run something like JMeter to do page requests and sessions >>> that are similar to real world usage. There are various open source >>> and commercial tools for this and for any performance test this is >>> the only way to go. >> >> Yes, that is our current plan. Yesterday I've read a bit about The >> Grinder, which was proposed on this list a few days ago, and today >> I want >> to try it. >> >>> If you plan on having any sort of load on your servers doing this >>> sort of thing should be considered necessary. If you find >>> performance >>> problems explaining and fixing them requires a lot of knowledge, >>> basically about every piece of software and hardware involved. >>> With a >>> bit of optimization you can often dramatically improve results >>> though... >> >> Exactly that's the point why I've posted the issue to this list. I >> hope >> I'll find the problem. If I can say I've found it, I'll post my >> results. >> >> Thanks for your answer. >> >> Best regards, >> Fabian. >> >> >> > > -- > View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Entity-Engine- > Performance-tf2252097.html#a6393475 > Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > |
«
Return to OFBiz - User
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |