These are HProf results CPU SAMPLES BEGIN (total = 3267) Sat Sep 6 12:27:45 2008 rank self accum count trace method 1 15.70% 15.70% 513 300397 java.net.PlainSocketImpl.socketAccept 2 10.47% 26.17% 342 300856 java.net.SocketInputStream.socketRead0 3 5.23% 31.40% 171 302117 java.net.PlainDatagramSocketImpl.receive0 4 5.23% 36.64% 171 301880 java.net.SocketInputStream.socketRead0 5 5.23% 41.87% 171 301035 weblogic.socket.DevPollSocketMuxer.doPoll 6 3.28% 45.15% 107 303426 ognl.Ognl.getValue 7 2.48% 47.63% 81 301738 sun.reflect.Reflection.getCallerClass 8 1.99% 49.62% 65 300923 java.lang.String.intern 9 1.87% 51.48% 61 303423 ognl.SimpleNode.evaluateGetValueBody 10 1.81% 53.29% 59 300505 java.util.zip.ZipFile.getEntry 11 1.56% 54.85% 51 301639 java.lang.Throwable.fillInStackTrace 12 1.41% 56.26% 46 303434 java.util.ResourceBundle.getObject 13 1.16% 57.42% 38 301739 java.lang.Object.clone 14 1.13% 58.56% 37 303267 ognl.OgnlRuntime.getHandler 15 1.01% 59.57% 33 301953 java.lang.Object.hashCode
Al Sutton wrote: > > Do the ideas listed at > > http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/Programming/HPROF.html > > shed any light on it? > > sajanv007 wrote: >> I am using the latest Freemarker version 2.3.13 and Spring 2.5 OGNL 2.7.2 >> with Javaassist . >> >> Al Sutton wrote: >> >>> Replace your freemarker lib with 2.3.13 or later. Prior releases had a >>> concurrency performance issue. >>> >>> Al. >>> >>> sajanv007 wrote: >>> >>>> It is a solaris box and has 16 GB memory and 4 CPU it is high end >>>> server >>>> class machine . Some how I suspect it is the OGNL or Freemarker >>>> rendering >>>> issue . >>>> >>>> Jim Kiley wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> What kind of server are you using here, how much memory, what CPU -- >>>>> when >>>>> we >>>>> are getting to CPU utilization, all of these issues are relevant. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:43 PM, sajanv007 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> I have tried all the tuning parameters mentioned in the link somehow >>>>>> CPU >>>>>> utilization is always 80% ,I observed that it takes tags are rendered >>>>>> from >>>>>> free marker cache but still the cpu 80-90% . >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> >>>>>> Sajan >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Nils-Helge Garli wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Maybe this can help: >>>>>>> http://struts.apache.org/2.0.11.2/docs/performance-tuning.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Nils-H >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 9:11 PM, sajanv007 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is huge performance issue and CPU hogging with Struts2 tag , >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> this >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> was >>>>>>>> observed while rendering JSP. These are some performance results >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> obtained >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> Strut 2 Tag - With all performance tuning applied as per Struts 2 >>>>>>>> documentation - Freemarker caching etc... >>>>>>>> Load Runner Tool >>>>>>>> 40 users >>>>>>>> 900 hits per second >>>>>>>> 10 transaction per second >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Results >>>>>>>> CPU utilization 90% >>>>>>>> Response 3.5 sec >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Replaced some of Struts2 Tag , with Custom JSP Tags like (s:label, >>>>>>>> s:text,s:textfield,s:hidden,s:param) >>>>>>>> 40 users >>>>>>>> 900 hits per second >>>>>>>> 15 transaction per second >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Results >>>>>>>> CPU utilization 70% >>>>>>>> Response 2.0 sec >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Some where down the line Struts 2 tag are very cpu hungry , to >>>>>>>> people >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> to >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> adopt to strut2 framework cpu utilization should be optimized . >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Did anybody come across on how to over come this problem >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> View this message in context: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Performance-and-High-CPU-utilization-tp19559123p19559123.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sent from the Struts - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> View this message in context: >>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Performance-and-High-CPU-utilization-tp19559123p19560223.html >>>>>> Sent from the Struts - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Jim Kiley >>>>> Technical Consultant | Summa >>>>> [p] 412.258.3346 [m] 412.445.1729 >>>>> http://www.summa-tech.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Performance-and-High-CPU-utilization-tp19559123p19561442.html Sent from the Struts - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
