archiva-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Julien HENRY <henr...@yahoo.fr>
Subject Re : Archiva performance question
Date Wed, 22 Jul 2009 16:22:50 GMT
Hi,

In my company some users are reporting the same issue: they prefer to use direct repository
access instead of our internal Archiva because of performance drop.

I plan to use an external DB instead of embedded Derby to see if it improves performances,
but I'm very interested to know if there is something else I can do.

Regards,

Julien




________________________________
De : Sergey Nikitin <nikitin.k172@gmail.com>
À : users@archiva.apache.org
Envoyé le : Mardi, 21 Juillet 2009, 17h55mn 49s
Objet : Archiva performance question


Hi,

I've started with Archiva evaluation and noticed that build time for project
is increased by ~40-50% in case Archiva is used instead of simple remote
repositories specification.

I am building my test project on "machine A", Archiva is installed on
"machine B". Both machines are in a very fast network.

Typical maven behaviour is:

"Downloading: ..."
hang for 2-3 seconds
"... downloaded"

File size don't matter that much - POM file and 6Mb jar got almost same
download time from Archiva.
Internet connection is very fast for both machines.

Are there some things to take a look on? Or it is inevitable performance
drop due to all the things Archiva does behind the curtain?

Sergey
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Archiva-performance-question-tp24590470p24590470.html
Sent from the archiva-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


      
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message