 | Mailing List | | Home | | Forum Home | | JBoss - Java Application Server | | Struts - A MVC web framework | | Tomcat - JSP/Servlet container | | iText - An open source PDF Java Library | | JDOM - JDOM XML Parser | | J2EE - A mailing list for Java(tm) 2 Platform, Enterprise Edition | | J2EE Pattern - An interest list for Sun Java Center J2EE Pattern Catalog | | Servlet - A mailing list for discussion about Sun Microsystem's Java Servlet API Technology | | JSP - A mailing list about Java Server Pages specification and reference | |
Struts & Hibernate
|
|
|
| | | tomcat 5.0.16 Replication | tomcat 5.0.16 Replication 2004-01-08 - By jean-philippe.belanger@(protected)
Back
Hi Filip.
I did some profiling of 40mins of tomcat with and without a 2nd node up.
here are the results with
-Xrunhprof:cpu=samples,thread=y,file=/u01/portal/java.hprof.txt,depth=10:
Those number are cpu=times and not samples since the later one freezes
on my systems.
So that list shows the time spent in each methods.
Major difference the some call to the sun.nio.ch.PollArrayWrapper class.
I don't know much about those NIOs packages but 819000 call in 40 mins
is a lot.
The Socket Interface was called more than twice with 2 hosts than with a
single one. Which seams normal.
Maybe this can help.
If you need the complete hprof file I can send them to you.
1 host in cluster:
CPU TIME (ms) BEGIN (total = 19701) Thu Jan 8 10:00:59 2004
rank self accum count trace method
1 11.48% 11.48% 54 85 java.lang.Object 
2 11.46% 22.94% 117 86 java.lang.Object
3 10.95% 33.89% 4115 215 java.net.PlainDatagramSocketImpl
4 10.93% 44.81% 4114 224 java.lang.Thread
5 10.91% 55.73% 19005 214 sun.nio.ch.PollArrayWrapper.poll0
6 7.37% 63.09% 28 495 java.lang.Object
7 7.24% 70.34% 10 576 java.lang.Object
8 4.57% 74.90% 90 716 java.lang.Thread
9 4.48% 79.38% 1 909 java.lang.Object
10 4.48% 83.86% 1 908 java.lang.Object
11 4.48% 88.34% 15 810 java.lang.Object
12 4.47% 92.81% 1 910 java.net.PlainSocketImpl
13 0.71% 93.52% 2 623 java.lang.Object
14 0.56% 94.08% 2 706 java.lang.Object
15 0.38% 94.46% 2 914 java.lang.Object
16 0.24% 94.70% 775 913 java.lang.String
17 0.23% 94.93% 3 475 java.lang.Thread
18 0.16% 95.09% 2 472 java.lang.Object
19 0.15% 95.24% 2 595 java.lang.Thread
20 0.15% 95.40% 2 586 java.lang.Thread
21 0.15% 95.55% 2 703 java.lang.Thread
22 0.15% 95.70% 2 476 java.lang.Thread
23 0.15% 95.85% 2 692 java.lang.Thread
24 0.12% 95.97% 218595 385 java.lang.CharacterDataLatin1.toLowerCase
25 0.12% 96.09% 218595 408 java.lang.Character
26 0.11% 96.20% 218595 433 java.lang.CharacterDataLatin1.getProperties
27 0.10% 96.30% 210925 389 java.lang.String
28 0.08% 96.38% 157259 387 java.lang.String
29 0.08% 96.46% 1 646 java.lang.Thread
30 0.08% 96.53% 1 634 java.lang.Thread
31 0.08% 96.61% 1 903 java.lang.Thread
32 0.08% 96.69% 1 714 java.lang.Thread
33 0.08% 96.76% 1 811 java.lang.Thread
34 0.08% 96.84% 1 715 java.lang.Thread
2 hosts:
CPU TIME (ms) BEGIN (total = 37247) Thu Jan 8 11:01:28 2004
rank self accum count trace method
1 9.56% 9.56% 52 85 java.lang.Object
2 9.56% 19.12% 29 86 java.lang.Object
3 9.30% 28.43% 3 267 java.lang.Object
4 9.25% 37.68% 6644 224 java.lang.Thread
5 9.23% 46.91% 13116 215 java.net.PlainDatagramSocketImpl
6 7.67% 54.58% 3 266 java.lang.Object
7 5.90% 60.47% 39 847 java.lang.Object
8 5.76% 66.24% 12 503 java.lang.Object
9 3.90% 70.14% 145 975 java.lang.Thread
10 3.90% 74.04% 1 1174 java.lang.Object
11 3.90% 77.94% 1 1173 java.lang.Object
12 3.90% 81.84% 25 973 java.lang.Object
13 3.90% 85.74% 1 1175 java.net.PlainSocketImpl
14 3.88% 89.62% 819692 214 sun.nio.ch.PollArrayWrapper.poll0
15 0.75% 90.37% 2 958 java.lang.Object
16 0.28% 90.65% 2 457 java.lang.Object
17 0.26% 90.91% 2 1181 java.lang.Object
Filip Hanik wrote:
>I'll try to get an instance going today. Will let you know how it goes
>also, try asynchronous replication, does it still go to 100%?
>
>Filip
>
>-- --Original Message-- --
>From: Steve Nelson [mailto:Steve.Nelson@(protected)]
>Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 12:08 PM
>To: 'Tomcat Users List'
>Subject: RE: tomcat 5.0.16 Replication
>
>
>
>
>Okay, did that got this
>
>BEGIN TO RECEIVE
>SENT:Default 1
>RECEIVED:Default 1 FROM /10.0.0.110:5555
>SENT:Default 2
>BEGIN TO RECEIVE
>RECEIVED:Default 2 FROM /10.0.0.110:5555
>SENT:Default 3
>BEGIN TO RECEIVE
>RECEIVED:Default 3 FROM /10.0.0.110:5555
>SENT:Default 4
>BEGIN TO RECEIVE
>RECEIVED:Default 4 FROM /10.0.0.110:5555
>
>*shrug*
>
>BTW It didn't go to 100% CPU ute before I started using the code from CVS.
>Of course the Manager would almost always timeout before it would recieve
>the message.
>
>Now it gets the message right away, but maxes my machine out.
>
>
>
>
>-- --Original Message-- --
>From: Filip Hanik [mailto:devlists@(protected)]
>Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 1:58 PM
>To: Tomcat Users List
>Subject: RE: tomcat 5.0.16 Replication
>
>
>100% cpu can mean that you have a multicast problem, try to run
>
>java -cp tomcat-replication.jar MCaster
>
>download the jar from http://cvs.apache.org/~fhanik/
>
>Filip
>
>-- --Original Message-- --
>From: Steve Nelson [mailto:Steve.Nelson@(protected)]
>Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 6:51 AM
>To: 'tomcat-user@(protected)'
>Subject: tomcat 5.0.16 Replication
>
>
>
>I was having random problems with clustering when starting up. Mostly it had
>to do with Timing out
>when the manager was starting up. I built the CVS version and it solved that
>problem. But it has caused
>some serious performance problems.
>
>First a little background.
>
>I have 2 servers, dual 300mhz cpq proliants, both running Redhat - 9, Tomcat
>5.0.16 (with catalina-cluster.jar build from cvs) The multicast packets are
>restricted to a crossover link between the servers. There are 3 hosts in the
>server.xml, all with clustering set up. They all function just fine.
>
>But.....the cpu's spikes up to 100% if I start up both servers. I know this
>didn't happen without the new catalina-cluster.jar. If I shut down 1 server
>(doesn't matter which) everything returns to normal. But when both are
>running both servers are at 100% CPU. I am trying to profile it now, but I
>figured if someone has already experienced this they could save me some
>time.
>
>Oh, and there isn't anything relevant in my logs. It's not throwing millions
>of errors or something.
>
>-Steve Nelson
>
>
>
>-- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-user-unsubscribe@(protected)
>For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-user-help@(protected)
>
>
>-- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-user-unsubscribe@(protected)
>For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-user-help@(protected)
>
>
>
>
-- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-user-unsubscribe@(protected)
For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-user-help@(protected)
|
|
|
