3.3 % of 512M is only about 15MB of memory.
With options -Xms200m -Xmx300m, you should see Xindice using at least 200M of memory space.
On Thursday, November 20, 2003, at 04:21 PM, Charles Hsiao wrote:
Have you looked the GC output during the test?
On Thursday, November 20, 2003, at 03:46 PM, Jill Rhoads wrote:
Ok, I chose a slightly larger file (15k) and inserted it into Xindice 500
times. (Remember I have a 2.7 Ghz Celeron and 512 Meg RAM.) Here's my
results:
1st trial: Elapsed time (InsertDocument): 45.3489589691 Elapsed time (RemoveDocument): 7.29849600792
2nd trial: Elapsed time (InsertDocument): 45.0858030319 Elapsed time (RemoveDocument): 6.85884797573
I did notice that Java only utilized at max 38% of my CPU at any time and
3.3% of my memory (512 MB). So I started playing with Java's options and
here are my results with the following JAVA_OPT's set.
-Xms100m -Xmx150m Elapsed time (InsertDocument): 34.5685210228 Elapsed time (RemoveDocument): 8.1172440052
-Xms200m -Xmx300m Elapsed time (InsertDocument): 35.4143769741 Elapsed time (RemoveDocument): 8.80774796009
-Xms200m -Xmx300m -XX:MinHeapFreeRatio=90 -XX:MinHeapFreeRatio=20 Elapsed time (InsertDocument): 36.0503109694 Elapsed time (RemoveDocument): 8.67905592918
-Xmx500m -Xms500m Elapsed time (InsertDocument): 34.4147530794 Elapsed time (RemoveDocument): 7.81289899349
Not much of an improvment. BUT it does look scarily close to what you got
with the smaller file which can mean that the java vm isnt' using my
machine any better than yours. There should be a way to get java even
more streamlined, but I'm no expert at that. Perhaps someone else has
some experience at optimizing the java VM. Anyone? I would be really
interested in learning how to this this myself.
/Jill
Don Stocks said:He he. I'm hardly in any position to laugh. Your box is running 8Xfaster than my old brick! ;)contents of this file into a variable and insert it into the database with
I've attached a copy of the document I did my test with. I just put thean incrementing name (i.e. insertTest0 - insertTest499) inside a forloop.Then I did a listDocuments call and looped through the array deleteingabout 1K in size and the inserts were taking 90 - 100 seconds.
the documents. I timed both loops. My initial test was with a documentthe fast CPU has on performance.
Thanks for taking a peek at it. I'm curios to see how much of an impactissues can be solved by a better processor. I have a 2.7 Celeron (don't
- Don
Jill Rhoads <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Can you lend out those XML files? I can test to see if the performance
laugh) with 512 meg of DDR.http://www.rhoads.nu:8080/~jrhoads/2D1517/project/xindice_browser.php
Here's where my work is with the php browser, if you're interested.statistics are going to be provided.
As you can see from the bottom of the page, I am making sure performancewhen inserting and deleting documents. I am planning an application that
/Jill
Don Stocks said:I'm curious to know what type of performance I can expect from Xindicethousandwill be managing a lot of very small documents; perhaps severalrunning on the localhost via XML-RPC. Here's what I found.a
minute. So I did some tests. I'm using PHP to communincate with Xindicejunker 333Mhz laptop w/ 128MB RAM. But inserting 500 rows with the sameInserting 500 476 byte documents: 47 seconds Deleting 500 476 byte documents: 31 seconds Unfortunately this is far too slow. I am running this test on my old
data into PostgreSQL on the same system only takes a couple of seconds.
I'm just looking for hits or tips to improve performance. I also want toXML storage is really what I need.validate Xindice as an appropriate choice for my data store. The nativeThanks, Don --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
Charles Hsiao
MRX Solutions Corp. Smart Practice, Smart Solutions
http://www.mrxsolutions.com
Charles Hsiao
MRX Solutions Corp. Smart Practice, Smart Solutions
http://www.mrxsolutions.com
