That is interesting. I did a stress test of a simple login process using a
single PIII450, with 100 virtual users (using E-Suite's E-Load). It was
using EJB, but the ejb and servlet call were in the same one server/orion
process, so I am sure the performance I saw was related to no network access
to EJB. However, 100 virtual users had no problem logging in, using only 2
database connections in a pool (my own pool class). At any rate, I can't
imagine that on a single server only 250 people can hit the server at the
exact same time. I have heard of Pentium 133Mhz machines handling over 4
million pages per hour (using Apache and linux).

One suggestion, try clustering the front end (and middle-tier) to see if the
performance and # of simultaneous hits doubles, or comes close, or if it
gives you a lot more. Orion 1.3.8 has a loadbalancer.jar file (I think thats
it) which you can set up on a 3rd machine to hit two front-end orion
servers. Its pretty easy to cluster Orion..just make sure any HttpSession
objects implement Serializable properly.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stanislas Truffaut [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 8:54 AM
> To: Orion-Interest
> Subject: Stress orion => servlet engine failed arround 200 users
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hello,
> 
> we do stress tests using webLoad (http://www.radview.com) on 
> our full j2ee
> application with orionserver on a full NT 100Mbits nerwork.
> 
> our current configuration is:
>    - Web Server:orion1.3.8+jdk1.3(or jrockit) on a PIII 
> 700MHz - 512 Mo RAM
>        and all ejb call are remote call to following ejb server.
>    - Ejb Server: orion1.3.8+jdk1.3(or jrockit) on a PIII 
> 500MHz - 256 Mo RAM
>    - database: oracle8i ...
> 
> at arround 250 simultaneous users, the web server falls and the only
> solution was to kill orion process on the web server !
> 
> so:
>   - is there any limitations on the number of simultaneous 
> users on orion
> servlet engine ?
>   - is there some recommended parameters to set on the web server ?
>   - other ideas... ???
> 
> 
> 
> thank's for any help,
> Stan.
> 

Reply via email to