Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 92770 invoked from network); 22 May 2006 17:28:52 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 22 May 2006 17:28:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 40427 invoked by uid 500); 22 May 2006 17:28:49 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-user-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 40402 invoked by uid 500); 22 May 2006 17:28:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: user@geronimo.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list user@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 40391 invoked by uid 99); 22 May 2006 17:28:49 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 22 May 2006 10:28:49 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [134.134.136.20] (HELO orsmga101-1.jf.intel.com) (134.134.136.20) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 22 May 2006 10:28:48 -0700 Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga101-1.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 May 2006 10:28:27 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx331.fm.intel.com (HELO fmsmsx331.amr.corp.intel.com) ([132.233.42.156]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 May 2006 10:22:39 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: i="4.05,157,1146466800"; d="scan'208"; a="39672711:sNHT10851024163" Received: from fmsmsx312.amr.corp.intel.com ([132.233.42.227]) by fmsmsx331.amr.corp.intel.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 22 May 2006 10:22:33 -0700 Received: from mssmsx402.ccr.corp.intel.com ([10.125.2.12]) by fmsmsx312.amr.corp.intel.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 22 May 2006 10:22:32 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: SPECjAppServer2004 details (was: Some observations..!!) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 21:22:27 +0400 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: SPECjAppServer2004 details (was: Some observations..!!) Thread-Index: AcZ2CgWbk6WEikZOTias2gWZW/udqQHkbUbgAAN6QtAABDNFoAABh+6wAACm+jA= From: "Zakharov, Vasily M" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 May 2006 17:22:32.0619 (UTC) FILETIME=[4F6C2FB0:01C67DC4] X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Santosh, What do you mean my RI here? Is it some application you develop, or something? Vasily -----Original Message----- From: Santosh Koti [mailto:Santosh_Koti@infosys.com]=20 Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 9:03 PM To: user@geronimo.apache.org Subject: RE: SPECjAppServer2004 details (was: Some observations..!!) Thanks Vasily for ur reply & report, Our requirement was to test our RI on the G-server. I am trying to tweak the ejbs ( in cmr) , but things are not going well..! =20 :-( Thanks, Santosh. "Don't talk about yourself; it will be done when you leave. " -----Original Message----- From: Zakharov, Vasily M [mailto:vasily.m.zakharov@intel.com] Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 10:17 PM To: user@geronimo.apache.org Subject: SPECjAppServer2004 details (was: Some observations..!!) Hi, Santosh, > JOPS ~ 1 (for) Geronimo looks very less from ur report. Sure, it's due to some configuration problem or bug. SjAS logs clearly indicate some benchmark components are not working as expected. > Does SPecjAppServer2004 might include some ejb (entity) transactions? Sure. > Do u have any numbers in a itemized way (more refined than JOPS metric). Sure. > Pls post them, that would be better [ atleast for me :-) ] Here I attach the whole output directory contents. You may compare them with the details published in FDAs here: http://www.spec.org/jAppServer2004/results/jAppServer2004.html > I am also testing Geronimo for our sample app. Wow, it's great! Performance is important indeed. Aren't you planning to use SjAS for measurement? Vasily -----Original Message----- From: Santosh Koti [mailto:Santosh_Koti@infosys.com] Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 6:46 PM To: user@geronimo.apache.org Subject: Some observations..!! Vasily, Great effort!! JOPS ~ 1 (for) Geronimo looks very less from ur report. Does SPecjAppServer2004 might include some ejb (entity) transactions? Do u have any numbers in a itemized way (more refined than JOPS metric). Pls post them, that would be better [ atleast for me :-) ] PS: ( I have not done SpecjAppServer benchmarking ) I am also testing Geronimo for our sample app. So far the results are quite impressive for pure data fetches , but those involving transactions are not very appreciable. (I am not sure; is it to do with any config, though I have tuned all my infrastructure components) Roughly speaking (in short): My readings (After some bit of tuning) for my sample app: My use case was combination of some txns & some pure data fetches. Run Duration: half-an -hour (will increase later) Users: 225 1. Pages Per Sec (Avg): 182.518 2. Response Time (Avg): 0.123 sec 3. App Server-CPU% utilisation: 15.66 4. Web Server-CPU%: 5.461 5. DB Server -CPU%: 10.088 =20 At a load of 250 it was breaking down , I increased the heap size to 1.5 GB, but the DB process exceeded beyond the (500-configurd , by DBA) mark. EJB transactions commit take too much time, & in doing so keeps the db threads alive for undesired amount of time, leading to an undesired response time ^.-( Thanks, Santosh. "Don't talk about yourself; it will be done when you leave. " -----Original Message----- From: Zakharov, Vasily M [mailto:vasily.m.zakharov@intel.com] Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 6:45 PM To: user@geronimo.apache.org Subject: RE: SPECjAppServer2004 up! Matt, Sorry for the delay, I missed your question. Sure, all the DDs and the deployment process description are available at: http://opensource.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/display/GERONIMO/SPECjApp Server2004 In fact, not everything is smooth now. The SPECjAppServer2004 Driver starts and completes normally, however the run logs show that only Orders Transactions work normally, while Work Order, PO and POLine Transactions don't in fact work. I guess some configuration issues still exist, while not clearly visible. I can also post the output directory logs or the whole FDA if it's useful. Vasily -----Original Message----- From: Matt Hogstrom [mailto:matt@hogstrom.org] Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2006 1:20 AM To: user@geronimo.apache.org Subject: Re: SPECjAppServer2004 up! Awesome news :) Can you share the DDs ? Zakharov, Vasily M wrote: > Hi, all, > > Finally, after a long struggle, SPECjAppServer2004 benchmark is up on > Geronimo 1.0! > (on my notebook :) > > My thanks to Matt Hogstrom, David Jencks, Jacek Laskowski and Aaron > Mulder for their help with various problems and issues that occured in > this work. > > Now I'm working on updating the running manual and on creating a > reasonable hardware configuration to measure the actual performance > more effectively. > > Vasily Zakharov > Intel Middleware Products Division > **************** CAUTION - Disclaimer ***************** This e-mail contains PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended solely for the use of the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by e-mail and delete the original message. Further, you are not to copy, disclose, or distribute this e-mail or its contents to any other person and any such actions are unlawful. This e-mail may contain viruses. Infosys has taken every reasonable precaution to minimize this risk, but is not liable for any damage you may sustain as a result of any virus in this e-mail. You should carry out your own virus checks before opening the e-mail or attachment. Infosys reserves the right to monitor and review the content of all messages sent to or from this e-mail address. Messages sent to or from this e-mail address may be stored on the Infosys e-mail system. ***INFOSYS******** End of Disclaimer ********INFOSYS***