To follow up and close the Tomcat scalability thread I opened a while
ago It turned out the bottleneck was on the database hardware end.
Reducing disk utilization resolved our performance issues.
BJ Biernatowski
This e-mail, including attachments, may include confidential and/or proprietary
i
hi GB,
From catalina.bat
rem CATALINA_HOME May point at your Catalina "build" directory.
rem
rem CATALINA_BASE (Optional) Base directory for resolving dynamic
portions
rem of a Catalina installation. If not present, resolves
to
rem the same directory
Not only.
The issue is really whether it make sense to use the operating systems
process table as a queue or not. Up until linux new threading model in
Linux kernel 2.6 this was definitely the case. The 2.6 threads are very
efficient, so most programmers will not notice a real performance
deg
This discussion focuses primarily on serving static files to a client, not
processing dynamic web pages. Most people running tomcat are processing
dynamic pages, like getting data from a database and compositing a page
based on that data.
An FTP site, or a static web site will typically be I/O b
Now that we are moving to the theoretical discussion, you will
probably want to have a look at
http://www.kegel.com/c10k.html
Regards
Andrew
On 21/06/2006, at 4:56 PM, Mladen Adamovic wrote:
I spoke recently with guy from Microsoft (project manager from
server division).
He said that hea
Alex Turner wrote:
Please also note that having a max threads of 750 is pretty much
gaurtenteed
to cause your system to grind to a halt under high load. (Most linux
systems I've seen buckle somewhere around a load average of 75 or so,
which
means 75 threads waiting for CPU time).
You mean 75
Please see
http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/Programming/linux/
Java on linux has been natively multithreaded since 1.3
Uops,
I haven't known.
Thank you all for your information (to Alex Turner, Leon Rosenberg,
Darryl Milles).
I was mistaken about this.
-
Mladen Adamovic wrote:
Biernatowski, Is your HTTP application multi-threaded ?
Irrelevant. Unimportant.
Why is that ? What happens if his app is using this line in JSP ?
<%@ page isThreadSafe="false" %>
Google is your friend.
Or to have i.e. extremely large Lucene database or some other
Mladen Adamovic wrote:
Max number of Java thread, IMHO.
Java thread is not the same as operating system thread.
In fact, JVM used to be single threaded on Linux and Windows and I'm not
quite sure has it changed recently.
So, you might have 800 Java threads but it is still one thread on
operatin
Please see
http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/Programming/linux/
Java on linux has been natively multithreaded since 1.3
Please also note that having a max threads of 750 is pretty much gaurtenteed
to cause your system to grind to a halt under high load. (Most linux
systems I've see
On 6/21/06, Mladen Adamovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
>> > Teoreticly, your servers should be faster if you configure 4 Tomcat
>> > instances (4 JVMs) to do round robin.
>> > You should be able to improve performances almost 4x.
>> could you explain why??
>> I wanted to ask
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
> Teoreticly, your servers should be faster if you configure 4 Tomcat
> instances (4 JVMs) to do round robin.
> You should be able to improve performances almost 4x.
could you explain why??
I wanted to ask the same question..
forget it. it was wrong.
I think I wasn't wrong.
Biernatowski Bartosz J wrote:
I am about 90% sure the bottleneck is Tomcat or what's running on top of
Tomcat. Application uses JDBC queries to MS SQL server
Chips are Intel Xeon. My monitoring data:
Memory utilization under 30%, CPU under 10%. Using hardcore performance
tools and systematic app
Darryl Miles wrote:
LOL. Each HTTP request/response cycle is handed off to a worker
thread, the available worker threads are dynamically increased to cope
with the number of the simultaneous HTTP requests being processed in
the moment.
But isn't it Java threads. I'm speaking of operating sy
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
Isn't Tomcat and JVM still single threaded?
Single thread = single processor usage
I don't think it was ever singlethreaded. And if it were, what would
the Connector setting
in the server.xml mean?
Max number of Java thread, IMHO.
Java thread is not the same as operating
rol.
>
>
> Basically, be warned: if you are running your connection to MS SQL Server
> (and using the Microsoft JDBC drivers) through a firewall, this MAY be one
> contributing factor of your poor performance.
>
> Just my $0.02.
>
> Gord
>
>
> -----Original Messag
ne
contributing factor of your poor performance.
Just my $0.02.
Gord
-Original Message-
From: Alex Turner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 12:42 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Tomcat's scalability
On 6/19/06, Leon Rosenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
20, 2006 12:42 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Tomcat's scalability
On 6/19/06, Leon Rosenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 6/19/06, Biernatowski Bartosz J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I am about 90% sure the bottleneck is Tomcat or what's runnin
install many many Tomcats. There is no
scalability issue.
Frank Peng.
-Original Message-
From: GB Developer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 'Tomcat Users List'
Sent: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 16:40:17 -0500
Subject: RE: Tomcat's scalability
How do you propose to add a 's
osenberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 10:49 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Tomcat's scalability
>
> are you sure that tomcat is your bottleneck?
> Your 4 CPU machine (which cpu's btw?) should be able to handle more
> than 1000 use
Ooops - forgot to add the rest
Andrew Miehs wrote:
Could be anything - the database
could be the indexes in the database, could be deadlocks, could be a
badly programmed application, could be high packet loss on the ethernet
interfaces, could even be tomcat -
As for the 90% guess - At l
On 6/20/06, Andrew Miehs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Biernatowski Bartosz J wrote:
> I am about 90% sure the bottleneck is Tomcat or what's running on top of
> Tomcat. Application uses JDBC queries to MS SQL server
> Chips are Intel Xeon. My monitoring data:
If this is a REAL problem for
Biernatowski Bartosz J wrote:
I am about 90% sure the bottleneck is Tomcat or what's running on top of
Tomcat. Application uses JDBC queries to MS SQL server
Chips are Intel Xeon. My monitoring data:
Why are you 90% sure?! Your SQL server is running on a seperate machine?
or the same machine?
ty/clustering, so could be off.
> -Original Message-
> From: Biernatowski Bartosz J [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 4:55 PM
> To: 'Tomcat Users List'
> Subject: RE: Tomcat's scalability
>
>
> My understanding of Tomcat&
On 6/19/06, Biernatowski Bartosz J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/19/06, Mladen Adamovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do top on the servers to be sure is problem in Tomcat or not.
>
> Teoreticly, your servers should be faster if you configure 4 Tomcat
> instances (4 JVMs) to do round robin.
> Yo
On 6/19/06, Mladen Adamovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do top on the servers to be sure is problem in Tomcat or not.
>
> Teoreticly, your servers should be faster if you configure 4 Tomcat
> instances (4 JVMs) to do round robin.
> You should be able to improve performances almost 4x.
>
could you
ing else is just kindergarten
:-)
BJ Biernatowski
Application Developer, e-Business
Leon
-Original Message-
From: Leon Rosenberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 10:49 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Tomcat's scalability
are you sure that tomcat is your b
2:40 PM
To: 'Tomcat Users List'
Subject: RE: Tomcat's scalability
How do you propose to add a 'separate instance of Tomcat' without 'adding a
separate JVM'?
Or do you/others mean by 'instance of tomcat' = 'a separate physical server
with single in
How do you propose to add a 'separate instance of Tomcat' without 'adding a
separate JVM'?
Or do you/others mean by 'instance of tomcat' = 'a separate physical server
with single instance of JVM/Tomcat' ?
>
> So far it sounds that the approach of adding separate
> instance of Tomcat and using
06 10:49 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Tomcat's scalability
are you sure that tomcat is your bottleneck?
Your 4 CPU machine (which cpu's btw?) should be able to handle more
than 1000 users (unless you are speaking about suns cpu) without
problems. Maybe you should provide more info
10:49 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Tomcat's scalability
are you sure that tomcat is your bottleneck?
Your 4 CPU machine (which cpu's btw?) should be able to handle more
than 1000 users (unless you are speaking about suns cpu) without
problems. Maybe you should provide more info abo
pplication Developer, e-Business
-Original Message-
From: Leon Rosenberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 10:49 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Tomcat's scalability
are you sure that tomcat is your bottleneck?
Your 4 CPU machine (which cpu's btw?) shou
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
On 6/19/06, Mladen Adamovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
>> Teoreticly, your servers should be faster if you configure 4 Tomcat
>> instances (4 JVMs) to do round robin.
>> You should be able to improve performances almost 4x.
>>
> could you explain why??
On 6/19/06, Mladen Adamovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
>> Teoreticly, your servers should be faster if you configure 4 Tomcat
>> instances (4 JVMs) to do round robin.
>> You should be able to improve performances almost 4x.
>>
> could you explain why??
Isn't Tomcat and JVM s
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
Teoreticly, your servers should be faster if you configure 4 Tomcat
instances (4 JVMs) to do round robin.
You should be able to improve performances almost 4x.
could you explain why??
Isn't Tomcat and JVM still single threaded?
Single thread = single processor usage
---
On 6/19/06, Mladen Adamovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Do top on the servers to be sure is problem in Tomcat or not.
Teoreticly, your servers should be faster if you configure 4 Tomcat
instances (4 JVMs) to do round robin.
You should be able to improve performances almost 4x.
could you explai
Do top on the servers to be sure is problem in Tomcat or not.
Teoreticly, your servers should be faster if you configure 4 Tomcat
instances (4 JVMs) to do round robin.
You should be able to improve performances almost 4x.
Biernatowski Bartosz J wrote:
Hello,
I was hoping somebody on the list
Almost forgot,
as for your question about multiple jvms with multiple tomcat instances:
we tried to scale tomcat instances on the same machine and it made no
difference.
leon
On 6/19/06, Biernatowski Bartosz J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
I was hoping somebody on the list might point me i
are you sure that tomcat is your bottleneck?
Your 4 CPU machine (which cpu's btw?) should be able to handle more
than 1000 users (unless you are speaking about suns cpu) without
problems. Maybe you should provide more info about your application.
Do you have any monitoring data?
Leon
On 6/19/06,
Hello,
I was hoping somebody on the list might point me in the right direction...
I am trying to scale up Tomcat based web application currently supporting
~100 users to 350 users.
It seems that I have enough hardware: 2 load balanced servers x 4 CPUs each
with 4 GB of RAM which is underutilized
40 matches
Mail list logo
