On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 4:52 PM, <therealnewo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: >> On 24/06/2016 20:01, therealnewo...@gmail.com wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> On 24/06/2016 18:41, Nate Clark wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Nate Clark <n...@neworld.us> wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>>> On 24/06/2016 18:25, Mark Thomas wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Can you provide the settings you are using for the Executor as well >>>>>>>> please? >>>>>> >>>>>> <Executor name="defaultThreadPool" namePrefix="catalina-exec-" >>>>>> maxThreads="500" minSpareThreads="4"/> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And how long do the initial 5,000,000 4k requests take to process? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 40 minutes. >>>>>> >>>>> Not sure this matters but I just double checked and there are actually >>>>> 400 threads in total doing the 4k PUTs. Two clients each doing 200 >>>>> threads. the 100MB test is 24 threads total 12 per client machine. >>>>> >>>>> Sorry for misinformation earlier. >>>> >>>> No problem. Thanks for the information. One last question (for now). How >>>> many processors / cores / threads does the server support? I'm trying to >>>> get a handle on what the concurrency looks like. >>>> >>> >>> The machine has two physical chips each with 6 cores and >>> hyper-threading enabled, so 24 cores exposed to the OS. >> >> Thanks. >> >> <snip/> >> >>> If it matters the system also has 256GB of memory. >> >> I don't think RAM is playing a role here but it is still good to know. >> >> In terms of next steps, I want to see if I can come up with a theory >> that matches what you are observing. From that we can then assess >> whether the proposed patch can be improved. >> >> Apologies for the drip-feeding of questions. As I learn a bit more, a >> few more questions come to mind. >> >> I'm wondering if this is a problem that builds up over time. If I >> understood your previous posts correctly, running the big tests >> immediately gave ~700MB/s whereas running the small tests then the big >> tests resulting in ~350MB/s during the big tests. Are you able to >> experiment with this a little bit? For example, if you do big tests, 1M >> (~20%) small tests, big tests, 1M small tests, big tests etc. What is >> the data rate for the big tests after 0, 1M, 2M, 3M, 4M and 5M little tests. > > Sure I can try that. For the in between tests do you want me to run > those for a set amount of time or number of files? Like each smaller > batch like 20min and then 10min of large and then next smaller size?
Ignore that question. I misinterpreted your 1m to be 1MB. -nate --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
