BTW, that's a cool idea: we should have not only the testsuite running on different JVM/OS but the ECPERF to see the evolution of performance accross releases (so we would need some kind of result page where each day we have a different value). NetBeans has this.
I could set it up to run on Windows Advanced Server bi-proc if you want. I was setting up some automated clustering testing before the training but had issues with build/build.xml calling testsuite/build.xml (bug in buildmagic probably) I wrote to Jason but I guess he has other priorities (such as looking at the blue sky) > -----Message d'origine----- > De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]De la part de > Stefan Reich > Envoye : samedi, 25 janvier 2003 02:24 > A : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Objet : [JBoss-dev] Re: how's ecperf going? > > > Hi Bill, > > I am running ecperf regularly on the 3.0 and 3.2 branches. I > accumulated a bunch of fixes for scalability and performance problems > already, plus a few fixes for inconsistent lock usage that I will merge > soon. > > Here are some things I noticed: > * the test fails when I deploy the BMP version, some of the beans that > have been created don't seem to end up in the database. > * the CMP version must be tweaked to use the util.xml BMP version of > the beans (search for SERIALIZABLE in the README) to work correctly > * the CMP version doesn't deploy anymore on the current 3.2 branch > * with the 3.2 branch I get many more spurious esceptions than with 3.0 > * a HashMap in the class CachedConnectionManager seems to be the most > contended lock > * JAWS checks for the existence of a PK before inserting a new row in > the database. This is pretty expensive. > * the LogInterceptor usage of the NDC class makes it a global source of > contention > * TxInterceptorCMP suspends and resumes a transaction in all cases, > sometimes even twice. This can be very expensive, especially with > global transactions. > > Since I am running the tests on PowerPC Macs and the Apple VM it is > hard to compare the results with other platforms. > > Stefan > > On Thursday, Jan 23, 2003, at 19:11 US/Pacific, Bill Burke wrote: > > > Are you getting decent results? I heard from Scott that you've made > > some > > improvements. Need me to merge your changes at all? Just want to know > > what's up. > > > > Thanks, > > > > XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX > > Bill Burke > > Chief Architect > > JBoss Group, LLC > > XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.NET email is sponsored by: > SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! > http://www.vasoftware.com > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
