On 10/4/10 10:52, Richard S. Hall wrote:
Thanks for the installer bundle, I did some tests locally on my Mac
using 230 bundles from GlassFish, this is what I see (note: the
"purge" command flushes disk buffers):
Empty cache
-----------------
[heavyweight main]$ rm -rf felix-cache; purge; date; java -jar
bin/felix.jar
Mon Oct 4 10:43:09 EDT 2010
2010-10-04 10:43:24,541 - BundleInstaller starting and waiting for
FrameworkEvent.STARTED event ...
2010-10-04 10:43:24,822 - Framework started: Installing bundles from
./load dir
2010-10-04 10:43:54,464 - Done.
Populated cache
-----------------------
[heavyweight main]$ purge; date; java -jar bin/felix.jar
Mon Oct 4 10:44:49 EDT 2010
2010-10-04 10:45:12,212 - BundleInstaller starting and waiting for
FrameworkEvent.STARTED event ...
2010-10-04 10:45:13,340 - Framework started: Installing bundles from
./load dir
2010-10-04 10:45:13,342 - Done.
You can see that the empty cache scenario takes about 45 seconds,
whereas the populated cache takes about 24 seconds. So, on my machine,
it takes a lot less time to re-load cached bundles...could be a
function of my disk speed, I suppose, but it is what I would expect.
Not sure how to proceed, other than trying to get more samples.
Interestingly, I tried the same test using the 3.0.3 release (the above
was with trunk) and I got the follow results:
Empty cache (3.0.3)
-----------------
rm -rf felix-cache; purge; date; java -jar bin/felix.jar
Mon Oct 4 10:58:23 EDT 2010
2010-10-04 10:58:43,340 - BundleInstaller starting and waiting for
FrameworkEvent.STARTED event ...
2010-10-04 10:58:43,557 - Framework started: Installing bundles from
./load dir
2010-10-04 10:59:03,373 - Done.
Populated cache (3.0.3)
-----------------------
purge; date; java -jar bin/felix.jar
Mon Oct 4 10:59:50 EDT 2010
2010-10-04 11:00:24,738 - BundleInstaller starting and waiting for
FrameworkEvent.STARTED event ...
2010-10-04 11:00:26,736 - Framework started: Installing bundles from
./load dir
2010-10-04 11:00:26,738 - Done.
So, the populated cache takes nearly as long as the empty cache (36
seconds compared to 40 seconds)...this also makes sense, since the trunk
has patches specifically designed to improve re-loading cached bundles.
-> richard
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 11:30 PM,<he...@ungoverned.org> wrote:
On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 23:25:35 +0200, Pierre De
Rop<pierre.de...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Richard S. Hall
<he...@ungoverned.org>wrote:
One thing, was your performance comparison based on using the new
cache
or
old?
I assume you are using a newly created cache for the framework
snapshot
and
[obviously] an old cache for the 3.0.2, correct?
yes:
old cache with 3.0.2, and new cache with trunk.
but I also checked that new fwk/trunk is properly working when being
started
with the old cache (from 3.0.2)
You should also be testing an already created cache (i.e., a
framework
restart), not an empty cache.
In the previous test, I compared with already created cache,
not with
empty
caches.
With empty caches, here are the results:
- old fwk 3.0.2 / fresh empty cache -> 15.8 sec. (this is
surprising:
I
would expect to get a longer delay, since the cache is empty
when I
start
the fwk)
2010-10-01 23:10:17,403 Starting Felix 3.0.2
2010-10-01 23:10:23,885 Starting cluster node "test"
2010-10-01 23:10:33,208 Cluster node "test" ready
- new fwk / fresh empty cache ->15.2 sec
2010-10-01 23:15:46,2 Starting Felix 3.1.0.SNAPSHOT
2010-10-01 23:15:52,417 Starting cluster node "test"
2010-10-01 23:16:01,225 Cluster node "test" ready
hmmm, I don't understand why the fwk startup time is better when the
cache
is empty (15.2 sec) than when the cache is non-empty (21.2 sec from
previous
mail)
Ok, I will do more tests ... may be I did something wrong ? ...
to be
continued ...
Hmm. Yeah, that seems a little odd. In that case, you should just
delete
your cache each time to get better startup performance! ;-)
Definitely let me know what you find out. I too would expect
framework
restarts to be faster since we don't have to copy the JAR files
first.
-> richard
/pierre
Is that what you are doing? Just want to make sure I understand
what is
being measured. :-)
-> richard
On 10/1/10 16:43, Pierre De Rop wrote:
Hi Richard,
I tried our app server with the trunk (old cache with the new
fwk/trunk)
->
everything works ok
(I install 195 bundles, and start 41 bundles)
With new cache/fwk trunk -> it's also ok.
I also compared the performance of the startup time between felix
2.0.2
and
felix trunk.
To do this, I managed to ensure that my linux IO buffers cache are
empty
before doing each test, by doing this:
sync
echo 1> /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
echo 2> /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
echo 3> /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
This ensures that my linux has released all buffer cache disk,
like it
is
the case when I boot my host (cold start).
Now, for felix 3.0.2, I load my server in around *21,1 *seconds
(it's
slow
because all disk buffers are empty):
2010-10-01 22:15:07,880 Starting Felix 3.0.2
2010-10-01 22:15:18,121 Starting cluster node "test"
2010-10-01 22:15:28,966 Cluster node "test" ready
and with felix/trunk, indeed, the server starts a little bit
quicker,
but
not so much: around *in 20,3* seconds (I also flushed disk buffers
before
starting the test):
2010-10-01 22:17:47,505 Starting Felix 3.1.0.SNAPSHOT
2010-10-01 22:17:56,815 Starting cluster node "test"
2010-10-01 22:18:07,798 Cluster node "test" ready
/pierre
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Richard S.
Hall<he...@ungoverned.org
wrote:
p.s. I deploy snapshots of the everything, including the
convenience
framework distribution or you can build from trunk.
On 10/1/10 11:37, Richard S. Hall wrote:
Hey everyone,
I've made some changes to the bundle cache layout and
handling to
improve
performance and clean up code. I've tried to maintain backward
compatibility
with old caches, but I'd appreciate is someone could try it
out on
their
caches to see if it works.
** Back up your caches just in case! **
Note that the new cache format will not work with older
frameworks.
So
you
cannot use a cache created with this new framework with previous
frameworks;
however, previously created caches should mostly continue to
work
between
the two although there will be a loss of fidelity since
changes to
state
are
only saved to the new way or the old way depending on if you are
running
on
the new framework or the old one.
For the curious, I've combined five bundle cache files (id,
location,
state, start level, last modified, and refresh count) into a single
file
and
try to avoid excessive file accesses. This appears to improve
startup
time
when you have a cache with lots of bundles, but your mileage
will
vary
based
on platform and other factors. Although, you won't
necessarily see
any
improvements if you are using an old cache, since it will revert to
the
old
way.
Thanks.
-> richard
