Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-09 Thread Christopher Schultz
Aurélien, On 3/9/16 10:53 AM, Aurélien Terrestris wrote: > thanks for this information, but Tullio said that his problem only occurs > with the NIO connector (it seems weird and I don't have sufficient > knowledge on how it is coded in Tomcat anyway). > > The post was already quite long before I

Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-09 Thread Felix Schumacher
Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8 From: aterrest...@gmail.com To: users@tomcat.apache.org Tullio, as suggested before by Felix, maybe you should try different connector configurations (defaults for HTTP connector are different between T7 (blocking) and T8 (non-blocking)) and see

Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-09 Thread Aurélien Terrestris
Christopher, thanks for this information, but Tullio said that his problem only occurs with the NIO connector (it seems weird and I don't have sufficient knowledge on how it is coded in Tomcat anyway). The post was already quite long before I suggested him to try both connectors to identify a

Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-09 Thread Christopher Schultz
Aurélien, On 3/9/16 8:50 AM, Aurélien Terrestris wrote: > The doc ( > http://tomcat.apache.org/tomcat-8.0-doc/config/http.html#NIO2_specific_configuration > ) doesn't say which one is the best, but we may think that the non-blocking > will work better under heavy load. NIO2 is newer and has had

Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-09 Thread Aurélien Terrestris
e a bug of the Nio protocol. > It's better to use Nio2 or standard ? What's the difference ? > Tks > Tullio > > > > Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 16:26:24 +0100 > > Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8 > > From: aterrest...@gmail.com > > To: users@tomc

RE: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-09 Thread Tullio Bettinazzi
016 16:26:24 +0100 > Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8 > From: aterrest...@gmail.com > To: users@tomcat.apache.org > > Tullio, > > as suggested before by Felix, maybe you should try different connector > configurations (defaults for HTTP connector are diffe

Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-07 Thread Aurélien Terrestris
> The problem disappears using tomcat 7. > Tks > Tullio > > > Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8 > > To: users@tomcat.apache.org > > From: ma...@apache.org > > Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 11:52:40 + > > > > On 06/03/2016 08:45, Tullio Bettinaz

RE: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-07 Thread Tullio Bettinazzi
among them (not OS version, not network, not browser). The problem disappears using tomcat 7. Tks Tullio > Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8 > To: users@tomcat.apache.org > From: ma...@apache.org > Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 11:52:40 + > > On 06/03/2016 08:45, Tulli

Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-07 Thread Mark Thomas
Tomcat. I'd recommend using tools like Wireshark and YourKit to find out exactly what is going on. Mark > Tks > Tullio > >> Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8 >> To: users@tomcat.apache.org >> From: ma...@apache.org >> Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2016 18:40:36

RE: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-06 Thread Felix Schumacher
> ??? >Tks > > >> Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8 >> To: users@tomcat.apache.org >> From: felix.schumac...@internetallee.de >> Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2016 14:00:11 +0100 >> >> Am 05.03.2016 um 12:34 schrieb Tullio Bettinazzi: >> >

RE: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-06 Thread Tullio Bettinazzi
What do you mean with : Have you tried switching the connectors on the tomcat side? ??? Tks > Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8 > To: users@tomcat.apache.org > From: felix.schumac...@internetallee.de > Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2016 14:00:11 +0100 > > Am 05.03.2016 um 12

RE: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-06 Thread Tullio Bettinazzi
I tested with 8.20 and 8.32 With nothing changed I meant simply that results didn't change. Tks Tullio > Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8 > To: users@tomcat.apache.org > From: ma...@apache.org > Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2016 18:40:36 + > > On 04/03/2016 13:19, Tulli

Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-05 Thread Mark Thomas
On 04/03/2016 13:19, Tullio Bettinazzi wrote: > Done and nothing changed. What has changed is that you have now provided a test case that someone else can run easily and confirm, or not, your findings. > Any suggestion ? Before anyone spends time looking at this the other question I don't see

Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-05 Thread Felix Schumacher
Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8 To: users@tomcat.apache.org From: felix.schumac...@internetallee.de Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2016 11:13:58 +0100 Am 04.03.2016 um 14:19 schrieb Tullio Bettinazzi: Done and nothing changed. Any suggestion ? It could be related to memory usage. Tomcat 8 can use

RE: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-05 Thread Tullio Bettinazzi
Tullio > Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8 > To: users@tomcat.apache.org > From: felix.schumac...@internetallee.de > Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2016 11:13:58 +0100 > > Am 04.03.2016 um 14:19 schrieb Tullio Bettinazzi: > > Done and nothing changed. > > Any sugg

Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-05 Thread Felix Schumacher
"+crono.elapsed()); } catch (IOException ex) { ex.printStackTrace(); } } } Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8 To: users@tomcat.apache.org From: ma...@apache.org Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 10:38:30 + On 04/03/2016 10:24, Tullio Bettinazzi wrote: The problem is al

Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-04 Thread Konstantin Kolinko
Tomcat7, quite stable on all clients, > in Tomcat8 it takes from 50 ms to 4500 ms stable on a single client PC but > very different from client to client. > Tks > Tullio > >> Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8 >> To: users@tomcat.apache.org >> From: ma.

RE: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-04 Thread Tullio Bettinazzi
= new BufferedOutputStream(bbs); for(int i = 0; i < 40; i++) { bos.write(96); } bos.flush(); bbs.writeTo(response.getOutputStream()); } } > Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 12:58:02 +0100 > Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8 > From: r..

Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-04 Thread Rémy Maucherat
try { > > for(int i = 0; i < 40; i++) { > > bos.write(96); > > } > > bos.flush(); > > System.out.println("Step 1 : "+crono.elapsed()); > > bbs.writeTo(response.getO

Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-04 Thread Mark Thomas
(); > System.out.println("Step 1 : "+crono.elapsed()); > bbs.writeTo(response.getOutputStream()); > System.out.println("Step 1 : "+crono.elapsed()); > } catch (IOException ex) { > ex.printStackTrace(); > } &g

RE: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-04 Thread Tullio Bettinazzi
;+crono.elapsed()); bbs.writeTo(response.getOutputStream()); System.out.println("Step 1 : "+crono.elapsed()); } catch (IOException ex) { ex.printStackTrace(); } } } > Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8 > To: users@tomcat.apa

Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-04 Thread Mark Thomas
ing the *simplest possible* web application that demonstrates the problem. Mark > >> Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8 >> To: users@tomcat.apache.org >> From: ma...@apache.org >> Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 09:42:22 + >> >> On 04/03/2016 09:39

RE: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-04 Thread Tullio Bettinazzi
takes from 50 ms to 4500 ms stable on a single client PC but very different from client to client. Tks Tullio > Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8 > To: users@tomcat.apache.org > From: ma...@apache.org > Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 09:42:22 + > > On 04/03/2016 09

Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-04 Thread Mark Thomas
ifference ? Try creating the simplest possible web application that demonstrates the problem. Mark > Tks > Tullio > > > P.S. : same server, same client, same network, same code both 7 and 8 > installed from scratch > >> Subject: Re: Performance regression from

RE: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-04 Thread Tullio Bettinazzi
same code both 7 and 8 installed from scratch > Subject: Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8 > To: users@tomcat.apache.org > From: geor...@mhsoftware.com > Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 09:30:33 -0700 > > > > On 3/3/2016 4:06 AM, Tullio Bettinazzi wrote: > > I've an

Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-03 Thread George Sexton
On 3/3/2016 4:06 AM, Tullio Bettinazzi wrote: I've an application in which I write a page from a Buffered Stream directly to the Servlet output stream (more or less 300kb). In 7 it works perfectly (100ms). In 8 , depending from the network connection and mainly from the http client itself

RE: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-03 Thread Tullio Bettinazzi
(but on the same client is stable). What do you mean with test setup ? I use my application as test. No Apache in front, directly calling Tomcat. Memory tuned ? no tuning at all raw, standard installations for both 7 and 8. Tks Tullio > From: tom...@olafkock.de > Subject: Re: Performance regression from

Re: Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-03 Thread Olaf Kock
Tullio, just checking: * Have you isolated this to be a tomcat 7 vs 8 issue or could it also be a same-time change of the JVM? Network connection? Caching? * What's the test setup that you're using? Memory tuned? Apache in front? HTTP connector? AJP? Olaf Am 03.03.2016 um 12:06 schrieb Tullio

Performance regression from 7 to 8

2016-03-03 Thread Tullio Bettinazzi
I've an application in which I write a page from a Buffered Stream directly to the Servlet output stream (more or less 300kb). In 7 it works perfectly (100ms). In 8 , depending from the network connection and mainly from the http client itself (the browser in the PC) the same operation takes