I will run a test in the meantime to check but this is very much unlikely,
I can see on the Amazon console that the load balancer CPU is hardly doing
anything with peaks at 2%. Let's assume load balancer is not an issue.

Szymon

On 28 November 2016 at 12:29, André Warnier (tomcat) <a...@ice-sa.com> wrote:

> On 28.11.2016 12:52, Szymon Czaja wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I have updated my question on SO. I have noticed that the number of
>> ESTABLISHED connections goes up on the client after few minutes. I
>> expected
>> the same on the server which does not seem to be the case. Any ideas?
>>
>
> Just a guess without looking very deep into your data : you say somewhere
> that the requests go through a proxy. Maybe the client "established" TCP
> connections are with that proxy, while the ones you see on the tomcat
> server are the connections from the proxy ?
> (In other words, it is the proxy that is the bottleneck ?)
>
>
>
>
>> Szymon
>>
>> On 28 November 2016 at 10:05, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 28/11/2016 09:53, Szymon Czaja wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>> I have asked the question on StackOverflow but I am not getting much
>>>> response:
>>>>
>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/40793335/why-tomcat-
>>>> does-not-pass-a-tsung-performance-test-at-40-requests-per-second
>>>>
>>>> Could anyone help me understand why is Tomcat unable to keep up with the
>>>> processing when running Tsung yet Apache Bench tests do not relveal any
>>>> scalability issues?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'd recommend taking some thread dumps and looking at netstat output to
>>> try and figure out what is going on.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
>
>

Reply via email to