[JBoss-user] [JBossCache] - Re: JDBC persistance with pojo cache and performance issue
you might already have the issue number. Its JBCACHE-382 here is the link I got in my email. I still don't see it on the jira main page for jboss cache. http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBCACHE-382?page=all View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3914832#3914832 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3914832 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [JBossCache] - Re: JDBC persistance with pojo cache and performance issue
I just created Jira issue. I have created a test case with dummy business objects and associated class/interfaces that showcases the slowness of this scenario. There is a build.xml that does the whole thing after configuring the jdbc parameters in the service xml file. I'd appreciate any feedback later on when you have a chance to look at it. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3914604#3914604 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3914604 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [JBossCache] - Re: JDBC persistance with pojo cache and performance issue
I traced through the code and found that the majority of the time for processing of one POJO object (14 seconds out of 17 seconds) was spend in JDBCCacheLoader.put(List modifications) The insert of serialized object into DB didn't take any more than 300 miliseconds. The POJO object has about a 100 fields, primitives mostly, distributed between 3 different interfaces, one interface extending another, all the way to the POJO object that implements the aggregate interface. This delay however seems to be only endemic of the JDBCCacheLoader. The FileCacheLoader does not display this kind of behaviour. I can put togehter a test case and upload to Jira ? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3914099#3914099 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3914099 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [JBossCache] - Re: JDBC persistance with pojo cache and performance issue
I am thinking that writing a BLOB to DB in itself should not be that slow. Its is probably the way the aspectized POJO is being serialized and writen to DB is taking a while. To not use BLOB, would mean I have to break up my POJO and write out fields seperatly to jbosscache table, right ? I assume that should be done using JDBCCacheLoader or my own custom cache loader. Is this correct ? Do you think, hybernate buys me anything here, or am I totaly confused. thanks for info. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3913877#3913877 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3913877 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [JBossCache] - JDBC persistance with pojo cache and performance issue
I turned on JDBC persistance with Informix backend using TreeCacheAOP. The performance numbers are horribly slow. The "jbosscache" table created as part of service startup has the columns "fqn","node","parent" with types varchar(255), blob, varchar(255) respectively. The inserts of my pojo business objects as they are serialized into byte stream by the cache, are taking on the average of 15 seconds for each row. The DB is on another server off of the subnet. denormolizing the pojo object and writing a row out with all pojo fields to non-blob/byte columns as varchar, integers, etc. is a lot faster. Is this going to be the expected behaviour where JDBC persistance of POJO objects using serialized byte stream as default mechanism by TreeCache/AOP is going to be magnitude slower ? Can someone suggest a way to use JDBC persistance and yet make it fast or as fast as file persistance, etc. ? Maybe my own cacheLoader scheme ? I have to use JDBC/informix(vs. sleepycat) in order to not worry about local disk failure issues on persistance and recovery. A remote DB seems to be way. thanks View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3913859#3913859 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3913859 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [JBossCache] - TreeCacheAop and JDBC Persistance and NotSerializableExcepti
I get java.io.NotSerializableException when using the JDBC Cache loader to persist to JDBC backend. I was under the impression that with TreeCacheAop and aspectizing, there is no need to Serialize my cache business objects. could someone shed some light on this or point me to specific section in docs for this ? | | [16:16:31.916] [INFO ] [PrimaryCacheTest][setUp] - SETUP | [16:16:32.555] [INFO ] [cache.PropertyConfigurator][] - Found existing property editor for org.w3c.dom.Element: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [16:16:33.105] [INFO ] [cache.PropertyConfigurator][configure] - configure(): attribute size: 20 | [16:16:33.140] [INFO ] [cache.TreeCache ][setClusterConfig] - setting cluster properties from xml to: UDP(ip_mcast=true;ip_ttl=64;loopback=false;mcast_addr=228.1.2.3;mcast_port=48866;mcast_recv_buf_size=8;mcast_send_buf_size=15;ucast_recv_buf_size=8;ucast_send_buf_size=15):PING(down_thread=false;num_initial_members=3;timeout=2000;up_thread=false):MERGE2(max_interval=2;min_interval=1):FD_SOCK:VERIFY_SUSPECT(down_thread=false;timeout=1500;up_thread=false):pbcast.NAKACK(down_thread=false;gc_lag=50;max_xmit_size=8192;retransmit_timeout=600,1200,2400,4800;up_thread=false):UNICAST(down_thread=false;min_threshold=10;timeout=600,1200,2400;window_size=100):pbcast.STABLE(desired_avg_gossip=2;down_thread=false;up_thread=false):FRAG(down_thread=false;frag_size=8192;up_thread=false):pbcast.GMS(join_retry_timeout=2000;join_timeout=5000;print_local_addr=true;shun=true):pbcast.STATE_TRANSFER(down_thread=true;up_thread=true) | [16:16:33.299] [INFO ] [cache.TreeCache ][createPessimisticInterceptorChain] - interceptor chain is: | class org.jboss.cache.interceptors.CallInterceptor | class org.jboss.cache.interceptors.PessimisticLockInterceptor | class org.jboss.cache.interceptors.CacheStoreInterceptor | class org.jboss.cache.interceptors.CacheLoaderInterceptor | class org.jboss.cache.interceptors.UnlockInterceptor | [16:16:33.310] [INFO ] [cache.TreeCache ][_createService] - cache mode is local, will not create the channel | [16:16:34.068] [INFO ] [cache.TreeCache ][cacheLoaderPreload] - preloading transient state from cache loader | [16:16:34.127] [INFO ] [cache.TreeCache ][cacheLoaderPreload] - preloading transient state from cache loader was successful (in 57 milliseconds) | [16:16:34.129] [INFO ] [cache.TreeCache ][startService] - Cache is started!! | [16:16:34.237] [ERROR] [loader.JDBCCacheLoader][insertNode] - Failed to insert node: com.mycompany.performance.cache.MockOrder | java.io.NotSerializableException: com.mycompany.performance.cache.MockOrder | at java.io.ObjectOutputStream.writeObject0(ObjectOutputStream.java:1054) | at java.io.ObjectOutputStream.writeObject(ObjectOutputStream.java:278) | at java.util.HashMap.writeObject(HashMap.java:978) | at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) | at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39) | at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25) | at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:324) | at java.io.ObjectStreamClass.invokeWriteObject(ObjectStreamClass.java:809) | at java.io.ObjectOutputStream.writeSerialData(ObjectOutputStream.java:1296) | at java.io.ObjectOutputStream.writeOrdinaryObject(ObjectOutputStream.java:1247) | at java.io.ObjectOutputStream.writeObject0(ObjectOutputStream.java:1052) | at java.io.ObjectOutputStream.writeObject(ObjectOutputStream.java:278) | at org.jboss.invocation.MarshalledValue.(MarshalledValue.java:57) | at org.jboss.cache.loader.JDBCCacheLoader.insertNode(JDBCCacheLoader.java:954) | at org.jboss.cache.loader.JDBCCacheLoader.put(JDBCCacheLoader.java:338) | at com.mycompany.performance.cache.JbossCacheAOPCacheTest.testJDBCPersistance(JbossCacheAOPCacheTest.java:449) | at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) | at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39) | at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25) | at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:324) | at junit.framework.TestCase.runTest(TestCase.java:154) | at junit.framework.TestCase.runBare(TestCase.java:127) | at junit.framework.TestResult$1.protect(TestResult.java:106) | at junit.framework.TestResult.runProtected(TestResult.java:124) | at junit.framework.TestResult.run(TestResult.java:109) | at junit.framework.TestCase.run(TestCase.java:118) | at junit.framework.TestSuite.runTest(TestSuite.java:208) | at junit.framework.TestSuite.run(TestSuite.java:203) | at junit.textui.TestRunner.doRun(TestRunner.java:116) | at com.intellij.rt.execution.junit2.IdeaJUnitAgent.doRun(IdeaJUnitAgent.java:57) |
[JBoss-user] [JBossCache] - Re: JDBCCacheLoaderTestCase and Informix persistance
I resolved issue, by debugging and tracing through the JDBCCacheLoader code. It is the sql syntax that is different for mysql v.s. informix when creating persist table schema in DB. mysql syntax is: | create table jbosscache(fqn varchar(255) not null, node blob, parent varchar(255), constraint jbosscache_pk primary key (fqn)) | whereas infomix requires: | create table jbosscache(fqn varchar(255) not null, node blob, parent varchar(255), primary key (fqn) constraint jbosscache_pk ) | otherwise syntax error is propogated out of DB. Had to turn on "debug" View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3912710#3912710 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3912710 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [JBossCache] - JDBCCacheLoaderTestCase and Informix persistance
I am running the provided org.jboss.cache.loader.JDBCCacheLoaderTestCase and trying to test this out with Informix database. The current test case assumes a mysql database. I simply plugged in my informix database settings and tried the test and get the following error: | java.sql.SQLException: A syntax error has occurred. | at com.informix.util.IfxErrMsg.getSQLException(IfxErrMsg.java:355) | at com.informix.jdbc.IfxSqli.addException(IfxSqli.java:3086) | at com.informix.jdbc.IfxSqli.receiveError(IfxSqli.java:3396) | at com.informix.jdbc.IfxSqli.dispatchMsg(IfxSqli.java:2259) | at com.informix.jdbc.IfxSqli.receiveMessage(IfxSqli.java:2179) | at com.informix.jdbc.IfxSqli.executeCommand(IfxSqli.java:721) | at com.informix.jdbc.IfxResultSet.executeUpdate(IfxResultSet.java:305) | at com.informix.jdbc.IfxStatement.executeUpdateImpl(IfxStatement.java:882) | at com.informix.jdbc.IfxStatement.executeUpdate(IfxStatement.java:206) | at org.jboss.cache.loader.JDBCCacheLoader.start(JDBCCacheLoader.java:718) | at org.jboss.cache.TreeCache.startService(TreeCache.java:1261) | at org.jboss.cache.loader.CacheLoaderTestsBase.setUp(CacheLoaderTestsBase.java:46) | at com.intellij.rt.execution.junit2.JUnitStarter.main(JUnitStarter.java:31) | at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) | at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39) | at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25) | at com.intellij.rt.execution.application.AppMain.main(AppMain.java:78) | | I don't see any special sql scripts that setup the schema so I am assuming that thecache.startService() takes care of setting up the schema for persistance. Can someone tell me what is going on ? I suspect, whatever sql is used to setup the schema is not compatible with Informix syntax. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3912679#3912679 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3912679 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [JBossCache] - Re: Garbage collection and unit testing
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote : Are you using putObject and removeObject apis?
|
| -Ben
Just putObject and cache.remove("/");
I got around this anyways by ensuring that each test case runs in its own VM
and in order.
thanks
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3912404#3912404
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3912404
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
___
JBoss-user mailing list
JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [JBossCache] - Garbage collection and unit testing
Hi ,
I am doing " new TreeCacheAOP()" followed but tree.start() and then after a
unit testMethod runs, doing atree.remove("/") followed by tree.stop().
I do this for every testMethod in my performance benchmarking test case.
This results in major memory consumption and full GC kicking in even when I
thrwo a Gig at the test which subsequently results in my benchmark numbers
getting thrown off.
Is there a way to ensure TreeCacheAOP gets fully cleaned out after the end of
each testMethod invocation.
I would hate to break up my tests and run them in different VM's.
any other suggestions? thanks
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3911025#3911025
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3911025
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
___
JBoss-user mailing list
JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [JBoss AOP] - Re: Aspectizing using
Thanks Kabir, that actually was a concern as to if reflection was going to be a concern espacially when you are working for real-time trading applicaiton. It seems that this allows doing away with reflection calls. my original question though is why the other classes in my project are being transformed in this way, even though they are not marked as such nor to they participate in the AOP scheme. e.g. I have nearly 400 classes in this project. Instread of just the 3 interfaces with advice hints, all are being transformed. This might be more to do with my not underestanding the jboss AOP precompiler steps. thanks View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3910751#3910751 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3910751 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [JBoss AOP] - Aspectizing using
Hi, I am newbie to jboss AOP. My exposure to it is mainly for TreeCacheAOP. I use the following advice for instrumenting my POJO objects to put into the cache(per TreeCacheAOP documentation): | | | I have only 3 interfaces that have this adivce using JDK 1.4 annotation: @@org.jboss.cache.aop.InstanceOfAopMarker When I run the ant target "aopc"on all my source files(including the ones that are not aspectized), It seems that all of them transformed into MyClass_Get MyClass_Set etc. so instead of just the 3 aspectized classes/interfaces, all of my calls objects are being transformed. Is this correct ? why ? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3910348#3910348 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3910348 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [JBossCache] - Re: putObject slows gradually with high number of objects i
sorry about that Brian. No injustice intended. Ben, I actually was wondering about the test case. I hardly see my own application doing things this way but was trying to see where the achiles hill was before I jump into adopting it. YES, I'd like to get a better, complete, test case for benchmarking purposes. Please let me know what would be better. ...keeping in mind that I have performance in mind for a near real-time trading application that will use this. k. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3910162#3910162 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3910162 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [JBossCache] - Re: putObject slows gradually with high number of objects i
Bela, I use a different object every time. To ensure that object creation does not factor into the benchmark, I create all the 1 objects before hand and maintain in a array which I then pluck objects from and put into cache. Ben, I ran the gc stats and sure enough there are bunch of full GC going on.: 65.557: [Full GC 191655K->135047K(204416K), 0.9030130 secs] 92.674: [Full GC 228937K->228937K(244088K), 0.9122410 secs] 105.148: [Full GC 283698K->267961K(304896K), 1.0661370 secs] 107.074: [Full GC 286969K->260993K(304896K), 1.6936240 secs] 111.455: [Full GC 286582K->270856K(304896K), 0.9772830 secs] 113.319: [Full GC 289864K->274151K(304896K), 1.0449530 secs] 115.512: [Full GC 293159K->149095K(304896K), 1.2714720 secs] 157.541: [Full GC 284661K->71844K(304896K), 0.7851200 secs] 221.847: [Full GC 283623K->79095K(304896K), 0.4558300 secs] the rest were all minor gc collections like: 257.283: [GC 214653K->198459K(302776K), 0.0237150 secs] 258.099: [GC 217339K->201325K(302776K), 0.0243710 secs] etc. I was very cognizant of GC issues when I ran the test that is why I started the test with: -Xms200m -Xmx300m. Apparently this wasn't enough. I bumped up the mem params to: -Xms500m and -Xmx600m and that got rid of the full GC's. Doing "top" and seeing process stats, I noticed that the resident memory started to creep up into high 400M so that helped. This had the side effect of making the incremental GC collections( v.s. full gc's) take longer, so definitly more fine-tunning required. Now the stats for 1 objects is at: [13:37:43.658] [INFO ] [PrimaryCacheTest][testPopulatingCache] - Average PUT time for 1 objects: 13 millseconds, Smallest PUT time: 9 milliseconds, Largest PUT time: 211 milliseconds, Total PUT time: 135350 millisconds. you see the total hasn't shrunk as delay times are now spread more evenly. This is much better. It still won't match the speeds of caching object references. I am going to turn off REPL_SNYC and use LOCAL and see how things go there. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3910109#3910109 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3910109 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [JBossCache] - Re: putObject slows gradually with high number of objects i
forgive me, there might be persistance but what ever replSync-service.xml is using for the PropagationManager example, is used in my bench mark. The provided output shows the exact configuration. Missed the hardware configs as well: - Pentium 4 - Linux 2.6, Debian install - 2 gig RAM (5400 rpm harddrive - this is a laptop powerstation) - JVM startup param for this unit test is -Xms200m -Xmx300m I know this is not the most scientific benchmark, but it might just confirm that putObject does increase gradually as number of objects increase. At some point I would expect 100's of thousands of objects in a managed cache being clustered being updated regularly at a rate of 500/second. k. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3909829#3909829 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3909829 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [JBossCache] - Re: putObject slows gradually with high number of objects i
I should also note: the benchmark is simply using the same configuration as PropogationManager example from Ben's article. So there is no persistance, View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3909825#3909825 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3909825 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [JBossCache] - putObject slows gradually with high number of objects in ca
Hi, sorry for double post, but first one results in forum software croaking for some reason. I am trying to do some performance benchmark testing and POC to see if I can use JBossCache for a high performance stock order management system that has some semi-realtime performance requirements. I have business objects that I push into the cache and timing the putObject(). I am seeing the gradual slow down of these puts as the number of objects in the cache increase. is this expected behaviour ? The first fill-up-loop that inserted 1 objects into cache had following stats: Average PUT time for 1 objects: 12 millseconds, Smallest PUT time: 8 milliseconds, Largest PUT time: 1718 milliseconds, Total PUT time: 121295 millisconds. In the same test case further down, I tried another fill-up-loop into the same cache for 100 business objects. The stats: Average PUT time for 100 objects: 10 millseconds, Smallest PUT time: 8 milliseconds, Largest PUT time: 42 milliseconds, Total PUT time: 1027 millisconds. The getObject() were very fast and typcialy under 1 milisecond, which is good. So what I am wondering is if putObject() graducal slowdown is expected behaviour or not ? If so, a 2 second put time for a business object is not acceptable in any application, regardless of real-time performance requirements or not. Can someone shed some light on this. I have included full output below to see if anyone can spot any missteps with my simple benchmarking. Maybe someone can suggest improvements. JUNIT OUTPUT: [11:34:59.227] [INFO ] [cache.PropertyConfigurator][] - Found existing property editor for org.w3c.dom.Element: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [11:34:59.243] [INFO ] [cache.PropertyConfigurator][configure] - configure(): attribute size: 14 [11:34:59.248] [INFO ] [cache.TreeCache ][setClusterConfig] - setting cluster properties from xml to: UDP(ip_mcast=true;ip_ttl=64;loopback=false;mcast_addr=228.1.2.3;mcast_port=48866;mcast_recv_buf_size=8;mcast_send_buf_size=15;ucast_recv_buf_size=8;ucast_send_buf_size=15):PING(down_thread=false;num_initial_members=3;timeout=2000;up_thread=false):MERGE2(max_interval=2;min_interval=1):FD_SOCK:VERIFY_SUSPECT(down_thread=false;timeout=1500;up_thread=false):pbcast.NAKACK(down_thread=false;gc_lag=50;max_xmit_size=8192;retransmit_timeout=600,1200,2400,4800;up_thread=false):UNICAST(down_thread=false;min_threshold=10;timeout=600,1200,2400;window_size=100):pbcast.STABLE(desired_avg_gossip=2;down_thread=false;up_thread=false):FRAG(down_thread=false;frag_size=8192;up_thread=false):pbcast.GMS(join_retry_timeout=2000;join_timeout=5000;print_local_addr=true;shun=true):pbcast.STATE_TRANSFER(down_thread=true;up_thread=true) [11:34:59.253] [INFO ] [cache.TreeCache ][createPessimisticInterceptorChain] - interceptor chain is: class org.jboss.cache.interceptors.CallInterceptor class org.jboss.cache.interceptors.PessimisticLockInterceptor class org.jboss.cache.interceptors.UnlockInterceptor class org.jboss.cache.interceptors.ReplicationInterceptor [11:34:59.255] [INFO ] [cache.TreeCache ][_createService] - cache mode is REPL_SYNC [11:34:59.270] [INFO ] [protocols.UDP ][createSockets] - sockets will use interface 10.58.8.75 [11:34:59.274] [INFO ] [protocols.UDP ][createSockets] - socket information: local_addr=10.58.8.75:32883, mcast_addr=228.1.2.3:48866, bind_addr=/10.58.8.75, ttl=64 sock: bound to 10.58.8.75:32883, receive buffer size=8, send buffer size=131071 mcast_recv_sock: bound to 10.58.8.75:48866, send buffer size=131071, receive buffer size=8 mcast_send_sock: bound to 10.58.8.75:32884, send buffer size=131071, receive buffer size=8 --- GMS: address is 10.58.8.75:32883 --- [11:35:01.285] [INFO ] [cache.TreeCache ][startService] - my local address is 10.58.8.75:32883 [11:35:01.286] [INFO ] [cache.TreeCache ][viewAccepted] - viewAccepted(): [10.58.8.75:32883|0] [10.58.8.75:32883] [11:35:01.288] [INFO ] [cache.TreeCache ][setState] - new cache is null (may be first member in cluster) [11:35:01.288] [INFO ] [cache.TreeCache ][fetchStateOnStartup] - state could not be retrieved (must be first member in group) [11:35:01.290] [INFO ] [cache.TreeCache ][startService] - Cache is started!! [11:35:01.293] [INFO ] [cache.PropertyConfigurator][] - Found existing property editor for org.w3c.dom.Element: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [11:35:01.328] [INFO ] [cache.PropertyConfigurator][configure] - configure(): attribute size: 14 [11:35:01.345] [INFO ] [cache.TreeCache ][setClusterConfig] - setting cluster properties from xml to: UDP(ip_mcast=true;ip_ttl=64;loopback=false;mcast_addr=228.1.2.3;mcast_port=48866;mcast_recv_buf_size=8;mcast_send_buf_size=15;ucast_recv_buf_size=8;ucast_send_buf_size=15):PING(down_thread=false;num_initial_members=3;timeout=2000;
[JBoss-user] [JBossCache] - best practices of structuing my business domain objects for
I have a business domain object called "Order". It has: order id, descritiption, sub-order objects, date, etc. what is the best key to use for populating the cache for this business object? e.g. the Demo for TreeCacheAOP uses the "Japan", Node, with " Tokyo" subnodes, etc. The key from my underestanding is simply "/monitor" to access this POJO object. There is only one object in the cache. In my scenario, I have many orders with unique order ids. would my key simply be something like: "/orders/XX" or even "/XX" where XX is the unique order id ? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3909603#3909603 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3909603 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [JBossCache] - Performance Benchmarks
Still missing or I can't find anywhere. We have a real-time application requiring near-realtime performance and using JBossCache/AOP would be contingent upon its performance. It would be helpfull if you guys can post some through benchmark numbers, specificaly for JBossCache/AOP as a standalone cache outside of Jboss container. - idealy with POJO and complex POJO's. regards View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3907937#3907937 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3907937 --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. Get Certified Today Register for a JBoss Training Course. Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005. For more info visit: http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7628&alloc_id=16845&op=click ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
