You'll see 32-core (no cpu saturation) and 4-core (cpu saturated) are
in different tabs in spreadsheet..

On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Daniel Feist <[email protected]> wrote:
> Here are the results!!  Interesting...
>
> I reran everything:
> - Added JVM options to even out garbage collection.
> - Ran each test for minutes 5 minutes.
> - Used Jetty SelectChannelConnector, same as you always used.  (other
> one is faster, but less stable).
>
> https://docs.google.com/a/mulesoft.com/spreadsheets/d/1j2TCeAQmrkWLZyQfetzmtqmUDaGQBiDAr20hC9gEfYE/edit#gid=590558615
>
> Configurations of httpClient are as you have in svn accept for 4.3.3
> (not minimal) which is configured as follows:
>
> The non-minimal configuration for 4.3.3 is:
> final RequestConfig requestConfig = RequestConfig.custom()
>         .setStaleConnectionCheckEnabled(false)
>         .setExpectContinueEnabled(false)
>         .build();
> this.httpclient = HttpClients.custom()
>         .setConnectionManager(this.mgr)
>         .disableContentCompression()
>         .setDefaultRequestConfig(requestConfig)
>         .build();
>
>
> Dan
>
> On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 8:15 PM, Oleg Kalnichevski <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Sat, 2014-05-17 at 00:13 +0100, Daniel Feist wrote:
>>> > Could you please find out if this difference is consistent regardless of
>>> > the CPU core number used by the system?
>>>
>>> Done, see other email I didn't record all figures, but did run
>>> multiple times and records differences.
>>>
>>> > Honestly, there is really no significant differences between the two I
>>> > can think of. I cannot completely rule out a possibility of some green
>>> > men from Mars randomly inserting Thread#sleep() statements but I
>>> > consider it unlikely. I'll see if I can reproduce the issue locally.
>>>
>>> I couldn't imagine a difference but in testing on 32-core with
>>> BlockingChannelConnector I got:
>>>
>>> - 3.1                                               |   75 K TPS
>>> - 4.3.3 Minimal / 4.2.6                 |   74 K TPS
>>> - 4.3.3 DefultHttpClient               |   72 K TPS
>>> - 4.3.3 Builder (from your test)   |   68 K TPS
>>>
>>> The difference is small, but it's an interesting problem, working out
>>> whats going on.  74 vs 75 is irrelevant, but 68 vs. 75 is bigger.
>>>
>>> >> I'm still not seeing a major issue with the contention i mentioned i'd
>>> >> seen in profiler, be an interesting experiment to test performance
>>> >> with 500 treads, both with/without proxies though.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > I'll give it a shot this weekend.
>>>
>>> Not sure you'll see any difference is cpu is constrained. If you do do
>>> it, I can test on 32-core box for you.
>>>
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>> I removed all dynamic proxies and got approximately 10% better
>> performance with my two CPU core PC.
>>
>> Could you please build HttpClient from my private experimental branch at
>> github and re-run your tests?
>>
>> https://github.com/ok2c/httpclient/tree/dyn_proxies
>> https://github.com/ok2c/httpclient/commit/246095522504ddffe07caf70db4c051fa0d31872
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Oleg
>>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to