Mach-II always checks if a logger implementation is available by asking the Log.cfc. These are always called whether or not a logger is configured. If no loggers are configured, it's a simple boolean returned from a conditional. The performance impact was nearly minimal when we tested. Without logging in Mach-II (pre-1.6), the throughput on a test app was about 2000 requests per minute on a laptop. With logging in 1.6, the throughput only dropped by something around 10 to 15 less requests per minutes (I.e. About 1985 to 1990 requests per min). Considering the great features logging offers, this extremely neglible performance impact (about .3% to .5% reduction in request per min) is worth it.
I'll spare you the list of common reasons for slow requests. Mach-II is usually the last place I would look. BTW, we did a lot of performance improvements to Simplicity (1.8). A third party user of Mach-II did so some performance testing of M2 1.5 V 1.6 V 1.8. We got the info completely unsolicited and it's something we will share with the group in the near future. I can't recall the numbers off the top of my head, but 1.8 was faster than 1.6 and this testing was done on a 1.8 nightly before we did our major performance improvements changes. .Pjf -----Original Message----- From: prashant roy <[email protected]> Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 10:56:35 To: <[email protected]> Subject: [Mach-II] Re: The request has exceeded the allowable time limit Tag"error Yeah, I agree with you. My problem may be because of server issues or long DB calls. just curious, when Mach-II calls the log.cfc or its always get executed or is it dependent on log flag? -prashant 2009/8/28 Peter J. Farrell <[email protected]> > Chuck said the following on 08/28/2009 12:16 PM: > > We ran into this issue as well on a production box and it turned out to > be the CF server monitor, specifically the memory tracker, that was hosing > up everything! We stopped it and the timeouts stopped. > > Thanks for mentioning that Chuck. I completely blitz'ed on that as a > possible problem because we no longer use it. The CF server monitor > completely blitzes all CFC based applications -- it added too much overhead > and basically hog ties the server. It's not a Mach-II issue because it's > all due to memory tracker especially. > > .Peter > > > > -- Prashant Roy --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to Mach-II for CFML list. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mach-ii-for-coldfusion?hl=en SVN: http://greatbiztoolsllc.svn.cvsdude.com/mach-ii/ Wiki / Documentation / Tickets: http://greatbiztoolsllc.trac.cvsdude.com/mach-ii/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
