tomee-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean-Louis Monteiro <jlmonte...@tomitribe.com>
Subject Re: [Newsletter] Re: [Newsletter] Re: TomEE Performance
Date Tue, 04 Sep 2018 09:41:25 GMT
Ah ok. Well I was asking if you were injecting when you took the thread
dump because from a server point of view I saw only one thread working.
If you were using jmeter with multiple virtual users, I was expecting to
see more than one thread working.

I'll double check.

@Singleton is by default using Lock WRITE which prevents multiple threads
to access the singleton.
If you don't need synchronization or if your code is thread safe (no
instance variables, etc). You can safely use @Singleton with Lock READ
which will be faster than @Stateless because there is no pool involved. And
again, there is no tuning to do



--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 11:37 AM, <fabian-a.richter@rohde-schwarz.com> wrote:

> Injecting? The jmeter was running during the threaddump. What do you mean
> with
> injecting?
>
> Is Singleton (Lock.READ) not even more of a bottleneck when it comes to
> multiple concurrent requests? IIRC we tried Singleton before, but not sure
> what the reason was why we went with @Stateless...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jean-Louis Monteiro <jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2018 11:30 AM
> To: users@tomee.apache.org
> Subject: *EXT* [Newsletter] Re: [Newsletter] Re: TomEE Performance
>
> Yes exactly.
>
> Were you injecting anything when you took the jstack?
> It seems that only one thread is working.
>
> We would need you to do it when you are injecting.
> If you could also give us the CPU usage when you take the jstack that'd be
> great.
> You can run `vmstat 5` on another terminal so you can see what's going on.
>
> You are using Stateless Session beans. Any reason you aren't using a plain
> singleton?
> With Singleton (Lock.READ) there is no pooling involved, so you don't have
> anything to configure or tune.
>
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
> On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 10:53 AM, <fabian-a.richter@rohde-schwarz.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Like this:
> > https://gist.github.com/TrustedGate/f670c079088404f42d69aabd409de7c4 ?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jean-Louis Monteiro <jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2018 8:38 AM
> > To: users@tomee.apache.org
> > Subject: *EXT* [Newsletter] Re: TomEE Performance
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Around SOAP, there are a couple of possible optimizations.
> > What would be helpful is to get into the docker container when you are
> > over the linear zone and get a jstack of the tomee process.
> > Post it here or in gist and put the link here.
> >
> > Jean-Louis
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 8:27 AM, <fabian-a.richter@rohde-schwarz.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hey,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > we have been running some performance tests with our application
> > > (TomEE
> > > 7.0.5 based) and are stuck:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Until 4 core VMs (or docker containers) we see a linear increase in
> > > performance, which is great and was anticipated.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > But after 4 cores, we barely get 10% (with 8 cores) more performance
> > > of the system.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > We used jmeter based load tests (SOAP calls) with 10/20/30/40 and
> > > 100 threads, VM to VM via 1gbit, and 4 GB of RAM.
> > >
> > >
> > > We played around with session bean pool sizes (min set to thread
> > > count, max to 1000) and stateful bean pool settings and also with
> > > jvm heap size and GC parameters, to no avail.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Are there any more performance parameters we can toy around with in
> > > TomEE or Tomcat that you can recommend?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thank you and best
> > >
> > > Fabian
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message