Aurélien,
On 3/9/16 10:53 AM, Aurélien Terrestris wrote:
> thanks for this information, but Tullio said that his problem only occurs
> with the NIO connector (it seems weird and I don't have sufficient
> knowledge on how it is coded in Tomcat anyway).
>
> The post was already quite long before I
6:24 +0100
Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8
From: aterrest...@gmail.com
To: users@tomcat.apache.org
Tullio,
as suggested before by Felix, maybe you should try different connector
configurations (defaults for HTTP connector are different between T7
(blocking) and T8 (non-blocking))
Christopher,
thanks for this information, but Tullio said that his problem only occurs
with the NIO connector (it seems weird and I don't have sufficient
knowledge on how it is coded in Tomcat anyway).
The post was already quite long before I suggested him to try both
connectors to identify a pos
Aurélien,
On 3/9/16 8:50 AM, Aurélien Terrestris wrote:
> The doc (
> http://tomcat.apache.org/tomcat-8.0-doc/config/http.html#NIO2_specific_configuration
> ) doesn't say which one is the best, but we may think that the non-blocking
> will work better under heavy load.
NIO2 is newer and has had l
protocol.
> It's better to use Nio2 or standard ? What's the difference ?
> Tks
> Tullio
>
>
> > Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 16:26:24 +0100
> > Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8
> > From: aterrest...@gmail.com
> > To: users@tomcat.apache.org
>
n, 7 Mar 2016 16:26:24 +0100
> Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8
> From: aterrest...@gmail.com
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
>
> Tullio,
>
> as suggested before by Felix, maybe you should try different connector
> configurations (defaults for HTTP connector
lem disappears using tomcat 7.
> Tks
> Tullio
>
> > Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8
> > To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> > From: ma...@apache.org
> > Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 11:52:40 +
> >
> > On 06/03/2016 08:45, Tullio Bettinazzi wrote:
difference among them (not OS
version, not network, not browser).
The problem disappears using tomcat 7.
Tks
Tullio
> Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> From: ma...@apache.org
> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 11:52:40 +
>
> On 06/03/2016 08
ronment rather than with Tomcat.
I'd recommend using tools like Wireshark and YourKit to find out exactly
what is going on.
Mark
> Tks
> Tullio
>
>> Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8
>> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
>> From: ma...@apache.org
>> D
gt;
>> Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8
>> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
>> From: felix.schumac...@internetallee.de
>> Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2016 14:00:11 +0100
>>
>> Am 05.03.2016 um 12:34 schrieb Tullio Bettinazzi:
>> > This is not a memory proble
What do you mean with :
Have you tried switching the connectors on the tomcat side?
???
Tks
> Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> From: felix.schumac...@internetallee.de
> Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2016 14:00:11 +0100
>
> Am 05.03.2016 um 12
I tested with 8.20 and 8.32
With nothing changed I meant simply that results didn't change.
Tks
Tullio
> Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> From: ma...@apache.org
> Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2016 18:40:36 +
>
> On 04/03/2016 13:19,
On 04/03/2016 13:19, Tullio Bettinazzi wrote:
> Done and nothing changed.
What has changed is that you have now provided a test case that someone
else can run easily and confirm, or not, your findings.
> Any suggestion ?
Before anyone spends time looking at this the other question I don't see
an
Tks
Tullio
Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8
To: users@tomcat.apache.org
From: felix.schumac...@internetallee.de
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2016 11:13:58 +0100
Am 04.03.2016 um 14:19 schrieb Tullio Bettinazzi:
Done and nothing changed.
Any suggestion ?
It could be related to memory usage.
Tomcat
e way.
Tks
Tullio
> Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> From: felix.schumac...@internetallee.de
> Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2016 11:13:58 +0100
>
> Am 04.03.2016 um 14:19 schrieb Tullio Bettinazzi:
> > Done and nothing changed.
> > A
} catch (IOException ex) {
ex.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8
To: users@tomcat.apache.org
From: ma...@apache.org
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 10:38:30 +
On 04/03/2016 10:24, Tullio Bettinazzi wrote:
The
clients,
> in Tomcat8 it takes from 50 ms to 4500 ms stable on a single client PC but
> very different from client to client.
> Tks
> Tullio
>
>> Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8
>> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
>> From: ma...@apache.org
>> Date
= new BufferedOutputStream(bbs);
for(int i = 0; i < 40; i++) {
bos.write(96);
}
bos.flush();
bbs.writeTo(response.getOutputStream());
}
}
> Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 12:58:02 +0100
> Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8
> From: r..
try {
> > for(int i = 0; i < 40; i++) {
> > bos.write(96);
> > }
> > bos.flush();
> > System.out.println("Step 1 : "+crono.elapsed());
> > bbs.writeTo(response.getOutputStream()
bos.flush();
> System.out.println("Step 1 : "+crono.elapsed());
> bbs.writeTo(response.getOutputStream());
> System.out.println("Step 1 : "+crono.elapsed());
> } catch (IOException ex) {
> ex.printStackTrace();
>
;+crono.elapsed());
bbs.writeTo(response.getOutputStream());
System.out.println("Step 1 : "+crono.elapsed());
} catch (IOException ex) {
ex.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
> Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8
> To: users@tomcat.apa
ting the *simplest possible* web application that demonstrates the
problem.
Mark
>
>> Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8
>> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
>> From: ma...@apache.org
>> Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 09:42:22 +
>>
>> On 04/03/2016 09:39, Tulli
takes from 50 ms to 4500 ms stable on a single client PC but very
different from client to client.
Tks
Tullio
> Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> From: ma...@apache.org
> Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 09:42:22 +
>
> On 04/03/2016 09
ifference ?
Try creating the simplest possible web application that demonstrates the
problem.
Mark
> Tks
> Tullio
>
>
> P.S. : same server, same client, same network, same code both 7 and 8
> installed from scratch
>
>> Subject: Re: Performance regression from
same code both 7 and 8 installed
from scratch
> Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> From: geor...@mhsoftware.com
> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 09:30:33 -0700
>
>
>
> On 3/3/2016 4:06 AM, Tullio Bettinazzi wrote:
> > I've
On 3/3/2016 4:06 AM, Tullio Bettinazzi wrote:
I've an application in which I write a page from a Buffered Stream directly to
the Servlet output stream (more or less 300kb).
In 7 it works perfectly (100ms).
In 8 , depending from the network connection and mainly from the
http client itself (t
same client is stable).
What do you mean with test setup ? I use my application as test.
No Apache in front, directly calling Tomcat.
Memory tuned ? no tuning at all raw, standard installations for both 7 and 8.
Tks
Tullio
> From: tom...@olafkock.de
> Subject: Re: Performance regression from
Tullio,
just checking:
* Have you isolated this to be a tomcat 7 vs 8 issue or could it also be
a same-time change of the JVM? Network connection? Caching?
* What's the test setup that you're using? Memory tuned? Apache in
front? HTTP connector? AJP?
Olaf
Am 03.03.2016 um 12:06 schrieb Tullio Be
I've an application in which I write a page from a Buffered Stream directly to
the Servlet output stream (more or less 300kb).
In 7 it works perfectly (100ms).
In 8 , depending from the network connection and mainly from the
http client itself (the browser in the PC) the same operation takes fr
29 matches
Mail list logo
