No, I didn't synchronize either. That would defeat the purpose of my
connection pool and *really* slow down performance.
If you're synchronizing access to the method that does your insert/update,
then that's your bottleneck. Do you really have to synchronize it? Can you
rewrite the SQL to avoid the overhead of synchronizing in Java? Are you
synchronizing the entire method or just the block of code that does the
insert/update?
Thanks,
--jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Brunton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 9:17 AM
Subject: Re: Tomcat Performance..
> Jeff Kilbride wrote:
> >
> > I'm a little surprised by your performance numbers, actually. I wrote a
> > small servlet to test Apache + Tomcat + MySQL speed and tested it on an
> > intel celeron 433MHz box with a single IDE drive and 128MB of RAM --
pretty
> > much a piece of crap. I ran Tomcat 3.2.1, ajp13, Apache 1.3.19, the
> > IBMJava2-13 JVM, RedHat 6.2 with the 2.4.3 kernel -- with almost no
> > configuration tweaking (default server.xml, default JVM settings). The
> > servlet would take a GET request, insert the parameters into the
database,
> > and then redirect to another page on the same box. I was able to get 54
> > inserts per second into the database with 25 threads running, which
equates
> > to 108 requests with the redirect. I was running a connection pool of 20
> > connections to the database. The network was a 100bT LAN and I ran each
test
> > for 10 minutes -- multiple times with the same results.
> >
> > I tested mod_jk/ajp13 against mod_jserv/ajp12 and found mod_jk to be
almost
> > 60% faster -- plus it's performance was a lot smoother. I was using the
Web
> > Performance Trainer software from http://webperformanceinc.com/products/
> >
>
> Did you synchronize either your doGet() or the method that did the
> insert/update into the DB? Maybe the problem does lie in Tomcat 3.3 and
> I should back out to 3.2.2. The problem dosen't seem to be Hardware or
> OS related since it's the same crappy performance on both an Ultra 60
> and a Intel box. I started off the testing with the request that I know
> should be the slowest out of all of them since it is a synchronized
> method for a Database insert/update. I'll drop the U60 back to Tomcat
> 3.2.2 and see if that gets any better numbers out of it.
>
>
> --
> Steve Brunton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Phone: 404-827-2756
> Chief Engineer Enterprise Systems One CNN Center, Atlanta GA
> CNN Internet Technologies ICBM: 84W 23' 45" 33N 45' 29"
> <*> Money Isn't Everything, But it Sure Keeps the Kids In Touch <*>
>
