ailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 2:04 PM
To: JRun-Talk
Subject: Re: JRUN Stability- reply 2
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
>
> You have to admit we were in some unexplored territory with that hotfix
> patch. (it's still being discussed).
>
>
Original Message-----
> From: Ben Groeneveld [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 1:12 PM
> To: JRun-Talk
> Subject: Re: JRUN Stability- reply 2
>
> Kathy, we run primarily on windows. I have done some tests on linux,
> but not to this extent.
&
o: JRun-Talk
Subject: Re: JRUN Stability- reply 2
Kathy, we run primarily on windows. I have done some tests on linux,
but not to this extent.
Our app uses keepalive connections that remain open, so we need a very
high level of concurrency. In production we run at 750 concurrent
connectio
Kathy, we run primarily on windows. I have done some tests on linux,
but not to this extent.
Our app uses keepalive connections that remain open, so we need a very
high level of concurrency. In production we run at 750 concurrent
connections (users) per node. The JRun server doesn't seem to
Ben,
How is the stability and performance of JRun server
after you set activeHandlerThreads to 2000? Usually
the number of the maxHandlerThreads should be bigger
than activeHandlerThreads? As I understand, JRun would
not perform well if the number of activeHandlerThreads
is too big. Could you shar
