There can be hidden dependencies on native code. For example, JDBC
drivers (OCI, ...). Fortunately there are usually corresponding 64 bit
libraries available - you just need to update PATH or LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
- Alexey.
Andrew Miehs wrote:
On 31/07/2007, at 2:04 PM, Mohan2005 wrote:
so no
I think what we're seeing here is the reason for the oft-heard,
seldom-heeded advice that the only benchmark which means anything is
*your application*. Once you see how the code you care about
performs, *then* you can bum a few cycles here and there to tune it
up. Generalities such as "64-bit ma
On Fri, Jul 27, 2007 at 07:25:26PM -0400, Christopher Schultz wrote:
> The reverse is true. First of all, no home user ever bought an 8-bit
> machine.
Um, ask the owner of an Apple ][ about that. Likewise my Synertek
SYM-1 used an 8-bit 6502 processor, as did designs by Atari,
Commodore, etc. Th
On 31/07/2007, at 2:04 PM, Mohan2005 wrote:
so now we have to identify if our application is 64bit compatible
or 32bit
compatible.
If your application is only JAVA, then no porting is required.
Andrew
-
To start a new t
topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Tomcat-with-8-GB-memory-tf4149367.html#a11922831
Sent from the Tomcat - User mail
for caching user requests and
> responses and back-end transactions. It is getting the right hardware
> and software architecture to use the entire RAM optimally for serving
> web pages.
>
> Ron
>
>
> -----
> To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomc
ly that, just space for more complex
>>> computations.
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>>
>>> Alexey Solofnenko wrote:
>>>
>>>> No, each of two 4GB processes will have only a half of the objects
>>>> under the same load. And I hear
Point taken,... thanks Hassan
> On 7/30/07, ben short <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> If they are uploading files, i
>> would imagine that you will need to have enough ram to hold the
>> uploaded file before you stream it to disk or database. Although
>> Tomcat might be smart? and store the uploa
Thanks Ben.
> Depends on what the users are doing when they hit your application. If
> the are storing lots of data in the session then you'll need enough
> ram to hold all the expected data. If they are uploading files, i
> would imagine that you will need to have enough ram to hold the
> uploade
On 7/30/07, ben short <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If they are uploading files, i
> would imagine that you will need to have enough ram to hold the
> uploaded file before you stream it to disk or database. Although
> Tomcat might be smart? and store the uploaded files to disk
Nothing to do with
Depends on what the users are doing when they hit your application. If
the are storing lots of data in the session then you'll need enough
ram to hold all the expected data. If they are uploading files, i
would imagine that you will need to have enough ram to hold the
uploaded file before you strea
So,... if I have 100s of users planned to hit the same Essbase application
via Tomcat (5.0.28), do I need a 64 bit machine?
And for us dummies, how do we set the heap and/or other
performance-oriented settings?
Karel
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> David,
>
> David kerber w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David,
David kerber wrote:
> Nelson, Tracy M. wrote:
>> | From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> | Sent: Friday, 27 July, 2007 18:25
>> | | First of all, no home user ever bought an 8-bit machine.
>>
>> Oh, I'll bet there are a ton of
Nelson, Tracy M. wrote:
| From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Sent: Friday, 27 July, 2007 18:25
|
| First of all, no home user ever bought an 8-bit machine.
Oh, I'll bet there are a ton of former Apple ][, TRS-80 and Commodore
Pet/64/VIC owners who would beg to differ...
I
> From: David Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Tomcat with 8 GB memory
>
> Yes... and I still have my old Tandy Color Computer :-).
My Model I TRS-80 still boots... slowly...
- Chuck
THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY
MAT
Yes... and I still have my old Tandy Color Computer :-). It was a good
machine for it's time.
--David
Nelson, Tracy M. wrote:
| From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Sent: Friday, 27 July, 2007 18:25
|
| First of all, no home user ever bought an 8-bit machine.
Oh, I'll bet
| From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Sent: Friday, 27 July, 2007 18:25
|
| First of all, no home user ever bought an 8-bit machine.
Oh, I'll bet there are a ton of former Apple ][, TRS-80 and Commodore
Pet/64/VIC owners who would beg to differ...
Hi Peter,
On 30/07/2007, at 11:55 AM, Peter Stavrinides wrote:
In theory yes you are right, but remember that a 64bit Integer can
also be calculated by a 32bit processor, but only in two CPU
cycles, this is where the theoretical advantage of the 64 bit
architecture lies.
Yes agreed. The
Andrew,
In theory yes you are right, but remember that a 64bit Integer can also
be calculated by a 32bit processor, but only in two CPU cycles, this is
where the theoretical advantage of the 64 bit architecture lies.
However in reality introducing the 64bit processor also introduces a
number
On 30/07/2007, at 8:02 AM, Peter Stavrinides wrote:
Apologies Ron this was supposed to be directed at Andrew Miehs!
Peter Stavrinides wrote:
From your comments Ron you obviously didn't understand a thing I
wrote, because you have just repeated me!
Dear Peter,
Obviously! :-)
On 29/07/2007
Apologies Ron this was supposed to be directed at Andrew Miehs!
Peter Stavrinides wrote:
From your comments Ron you obviously didn't understand a thing I
wrote, because you have just repeated me!
Andrew Miehs wrote:
On 29/07/2007, at 2:34 PM, Peter Stavrinides wrote:
32 bits processors can
. And this is without multi-threading performance
considerations. As usual, your mileage may vary and only tests can
tell for sure.
- Alexey.
Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: Alexey Solofnenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re:
Tomcat with 8 GB memory
I was under impression th
From your comments Ron you obviously didn't understand a thing I wrote,
because you have just repeated me!
Andrew Miehs wrote:
On 29/07/2007, at 2:34 PM, Peter Stavrinides wrote:
32 bits processors can represent numbers up to 4,294,967,295 while a
64-bit machine can represent numbers up to
On 7/30/07, Ron Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I
> The Microsoft study used Websphere which I understand to be very close
> to Tomcat.
>
>
Don't think they are remotely related, other than the fact that they both
can function as containers for java web applications :D
Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: Ron Wheeler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tomcat with 8 GB memory
2GB is the limit for 32 bit applications.
Minor correction: some versions of 32-bit Windows Server have a
boot-time option to use 3 GB for each user process, which allows a
If you read the references that I posted, you will see when 32 bit is
faster than 64 bit.
You are not the first guy to ask the question so Microsoft did a pretty
nice test.
Why is no major hardware vendor selling 32 bit servers for business
applications? If 32 bit was faster, cheaper and they
On 29/07/2007, at 9:08 PM, David Smith wrote:
"...but people advice that 64bit are 20 - 30% slower than the
32bit ..."
Could these people offer any evidence to this? Cite any
benchmarks? I would like to see the evidence of this before
believing it to be true.
We did test with out a
s is without multi-threading performance
> >> considerations. As usual, your mileage may vary and only tests can
> >> tell for sure.
> >>
> >> - Alexey.
> >>
> >> Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
> >>>> From: Alexey Solofnenko [mailto:[EM
I heard that GC does not scale linear with
heap size. And this is without multi-threading performance
considerations. As usual, your mileage may vary and only tests can
tell for sure.
- Alexey.
Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: Alexey Solofnenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re:
T
i-threading performance
>> considerations. As usual, your mileage may vary and only tests can
>> tell for sure.
>>
>> - Alexey.
>>
>> Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
>>>> From: Alexey Solofnenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re:
>>>> Tomcat wit
This is a Tomcat forum so lets focus on the role of memory in a Servlet
Engine.
Read the Microsoft paper.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/aa700838.aspx
Bigger memory space means better performance when you have large
numbers of users.
If you are designing a Tomcat application for
On 29/07/2007, at 2:34 PM, Peter Stavrinides wrote:
32 bits processors can represent numbers up to 4,294,967,295 while
a 64-bit machine can represent numbers up to
18,446,744,073,709,551,615. For modern hardware to take advantage
of the processing power of the 64 bit architecture a system
EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re:
Tomcat with 8 GB memory
I was under impression that GC does not scale linearly. That means
one 8GB process will be slower than two 4GB processes.
Not true. The time of a full GC using modern algorithms depends mostly
on the number and type of live objects, no
Solofnenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tomcat with 8 GB memory
No, each of two 4GB processes will have only a half of the
objects under the same load.
There's a significant amount of objects created by the container and the
webapps that are essentially permanent; with tw
> From: Alexey Solofnenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Tomcat with 8 GB memory
>
> No, each of two 4GB processes will have only a half of the
> objects under the same load.
There's a significant amount of objects created by the container and the
webapps
> From: Ron Wheeler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Tomcat with 8 GB memory
>
> 2GB is the limit for 32 bit applications.
Minor correction: some versions of 32-bit Windows Server have a
boot-time option to use 3 GB for each user process, which allows a
slightly bigger JVM
2GB is the limit for 32 bit applications.
Ron
Joe Nathan wrote:
ronatartifact wrote:
This is what Microsoft has to say on 64 bit using Websphere.
Basically 32bit better for small volume servers that can live with a 2GB
memory ceiling.
If you have applications that can benefit from
Why would you write down something in a serious forum that you just made
up with no basis in fact.
This is just fantasy that you could not have found anywhere unless it
was in a satirical send-up on science and technology.
If any of your stuff was even remotely true, then the top scientists and
The 32 versus 64 bit was discussed on a different branch of this thread.
- Alexey.
Ron Wheeler wrote:
If you read the article that I cited from Microsoft, you will find a
discussion about 32 bit and 64 bit performance that includes a lot of
these discussions including why a 64 bit Java Virtual
If you read the article that I cited from Microsoft, you will find a
discussion about 32 bit and 64 bit performance that includes a lot of
these discussions including why a 64 bit Java Virtual Machine is better
than a 32 bit version of Java.
A 32 bit OS will limit you to a 2 GB process space w
and threads.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Tomcat-with-8-GB-memory-tf4149367.html#a11839991
Sent from the Tomcat - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.
Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
>
>> From: Alexey Solofnenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: Tomcat with 8 GB memory
>>
>> I was under impression that GC does not scale linearly. That
>> means one 8GB process will be slower than two 4GB processes.
&
.
Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: Alexey Solofnenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tomcat with 8 GB memory
I was under impression that GC does not scale linearly. That
means one 8GB process will be slower than two 4GB processes.
Not true. The time of a full GC using modern algorithms
> From: Alexey Solofnenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Tomcat with 8 GB memory
>
> I was under impression that GC does not scale linearly. That
> means one 8GB process will be slower than two 4GB processes.
Not true. The time of a full GC using modern algorithms de
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Joe,
Joe Nathan wrote:
>
> Leon Rosenberg-3 wrote:
>> Sorry, this just sounds plain wrong. If a 64 bit processor comes
>> with 64 bit register it means that it can make an integer 64 bit
>> addition (long) in one operation,
>
> It does in single ope
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Joe,
Joe Nathan wrote:
> If your logic is valid, we should be still using 16bit or 8bit machines!
The reverse is true. First of all, no home user ever bought an 8-bit
machine. The 8086 (the first Intel 16-bit machine) was eventually
replaced by the 8
On 7/27/07, Joe Nathan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It does in single operation, but it taks twices clock pulse than 32bit!
> You cannot perform binary adder operation in parallel. Speed of operation
> is measured with the number of clock pulse. 32bit adder may require
> something like 36 clock pul
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Joe,
Joe Nathan wrote:
> Arithmetic operations on 64bit takes app. twice long as 32bits.
You are out of your mind.
> Note that hardware clocking time also
> slower than 32 machines.
Clock speed has nothing to do with integer width.
- -chris
-
I had a processor design class and know very well the actual gate design
in bit arithmetic. Aside from the propagation of the carry bit taking a
teeny, tiny bit longer in 64 bit arithmetic, it still occurs in a single
clock cycle.
Further, primitive data type sizes in java are very clearly de
erations can be performed in a second. The
number will change depending on your cpu clock pulse, which
is limited to about 3.5GHz these days. That's why we want more Hz
to get speed. That's the thing that give us the speed!
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.co
On 27/07/2007, at 11:30 PM, Joe Nathan wrote:
It's for the very simple reason: 64bit machines have 64bit address!
What is address! It's pointers if you are familiar with C, Pointers
are 64bit integers. Pointer arithmetics will deal with 64bit addressed
data. Arithmetic operations on 64bit takes
I was under impression that GC does not scale linearly. That means one
8GB process will be slower than two 4GB processes. There are other
considerations too: multi-threading - global locks will lock less
threads (maybe in GC, heap, application logic, ...), but cluster
overhead may be noticeable
g on personal machines.
As I mentioned, server can be different. Since many people may use it
simulataneously, there may be a need for bigger main memory. 64bit
address this market!
regards.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Tomcat-with-8-GB-memory-tf4149367.html#a118377
On 7/27/07, Joe Nathan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Leon Rosenberg-3 wrote:
> >
> > Could you provide some additional information?
> > So far 64bit machines always outperformed 32bit machines in my
> > personal benchmarks as well as in third party benchmarks I stumbled
> > upon.
> >
> > So it w
context:
http://www.nabble.com/Tomcat-with-8-GB-memory-tf4149367.html#a11837056
Sent from the Tomcat - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
programmers
don't understand underlying garbage collection algorithms. They tend to
make use lot more memory. If you control memory use smartly,
this can boost performance significantly as well!
regards.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Tomcat-with-8-GB-memory-tf
This is what Microsoft has to say on 64 bit using Websphere.
Basically 32bit better for small volume servers that can live with a 2GB
memory ceiling.
Fundemental problem is that a process can only use 2GB no matter how
much memory you have.
Java VM only gets to see 2GB no matter how much phys
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Joe,
Joe Nathan wrote:
> Otherwise 64bit machines suck! That;s why 64bit Windows is not
> popular. I don't them many shops selling!
64-bit Windows is not popular because it costs much more than the 32-bit
versions (though MS will send you a 64-bit u
> From: Joe Nathan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Overall performance depend on many things: CPU speed, number of CPUs,
> memory size, I/O, especially, virtual memory paging, network interface
> bandwidth
> 64bit machines come with better capacity except
> cpu computation speed!
Please state your
On 27/07/2007, at 12:19 PM, Joe Nathan wrote:
Christopher Schultz-2 wrote:
Joe Nathan wrote:
I would discourage to use such machine! 8GB means you are using
64 bit
machine which will be much slower than 32 bit machines.
Huh? Why would a 64-bit machine run slower than a 32-bit machine?
O
emory objects. It generate very little objects even though
it can deal with tens of millions records.
If you want to use big memory, you have to design to avoid such
seisures.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Tomcat-with-8-GB-memory-tf4149367.html#a11826544
Sent from
is not
> popular. I don't them many shops selling!
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Tomcat-with-8-GB-memory-tf4149367.html#a11826413
> Sent from the Tomcat - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
>
engineering basics, you shouldn't
be arguing about slowness of 64bit crunchers!
Otherwise 64bit machines suck! That;s why 64bit Windows is not
popular. I don't them many shops selling!
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Tomcat-with-8-GB-memory-tf4149367.html#a11
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lightbulb,
lightbulb432 wrote:
> When I asked this question I had in mind a few potential downsides to one 8
> GB Tomcat. One is memory leaks: if Tomcat starts to leak memory (not sure if
> this happens too often, if ever, but I'm speaking purely hypo
> From: lightbulb432 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Tomcat with 8 GB memory
>
> The last is at the following link, several performance
> graphs for Linux show a slight or sharp decrease in
> performance for a given Tomcat instance beyond a certain
> number
LgizNh/MatDmEupjdLvLvvDWgCfbHSj
> XLO50tctVgV5w+N/qwYYZEQ=
> =DJLh
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>
> -----------------
> To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org
> To unsub
> From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Tomcat with 8 GB memory
>
> Why would a 64-bit machine run slower than a 32-bit machine?
Try an IA64 - the sooner we forget about those the better.
> I don't think JVMs have used stop-the-world G
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Joe,
Joe Nathan wrote:
> I would discourage to use such machine! 8GB means you are using 64 bit
> machine which will be much slower than 32 bit machines.
Huh? Why would a 64-bit machine run slower than a 32-bit machine? Even
better: why would either
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lightbulb,
lightbulb432 wrote:
> If you have a gigantic server with something like 8 GB of memory, what would
> be the best way to run Tomcat 6 on it? One instance, multiple instances, or
> divide it up into two or more virtualized servers each with o
> From: Joe Nathan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Tomcat with 8 GB memory
>
> 8GB means you are using 64 bit machine which will be much
> slower than 32 bit machines.
Neither conclusion is true. We have 8 GB machines using 32-bit CPUs,
and proper 64-bit systems (tho
Our 64 bit machines outperform our 32 bit machines like night and day
using Tomcat 5, I can only imagine the difference with Tomcat 6... in
any event there is no difference for Tomcat it depends entirely on the
virtual machine.
>> Big memory is useful ONLY if you have applications that can benef
On 26/07/2007, at 10:57 AM, Joe Nathan wrote:
I would discourage to use such machine! 8GB means you are using 64 bit
machine which will be much slower than 32 bit machines. Big memory
is useful
ONLY if you have applications that can benefit big memory such as
database
systems. In Java, if yo
ething like 8 GB of memory, what
> would be the best way to run Tomcat 6 on it?
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Tomcat-with-8-GB-memory-tf4149367.html#a11806665
Sent from the Tomcat - User mailing list archive a
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Tomcat-with-8-GB-memory-tf4149367.html#a11804198
Sent from the Tomcat - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org
To unsu
74 matches
Mail list logo
