Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-users-archive@locus.apache.org Received: (qmail 14483 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2007 07:58:29 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 27 Jul 2007 07:58:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 75755 invoked by uid 500); 27 Jul 2007 07:58:29 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-users-archive@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 75579 invoked by uid 500); 27 Jul 2007 07:58:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 75570 invoked by uid 99); 27 Jul 2007 07:58:28 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:58:28 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of thomas.tom.mueller@gmail.com designates 64.233.166.176 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.166.176] (HELO py-out-1112.google.com) (64.233.166.176) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Jul 2007 07:58:21 +0000 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id d32so1798409pye for ; Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:58:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=hSgqRjlSvz+Os467pwTz0B0LM3yy8dMv8CZJhYlfUZuLpSY1M8oBR0wt+gtgsizjuZm1FmV3YaPhA/Y4/cBXxMNqR/PS5zZB84AqVzxODgIdbQhDUYINhFdSOYyPxSttT7ShKn8HDhnakqz+airjd6Q1+pFd5lmvcmtrIajue+Y= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=GXTaxDLuxDo54NbSfpFM4NNXCtXcf+YPwJ2QP3m0myqWcgf0uXs0AlZvHACksktOUv5KppZvvgs4SVZIBP9/6CSoseuVbHAOZ4I/e5lZoQvbDnK3ZGda2zVtvSA/OPxPjJh1N/oXRVCl4UYkCPtXET1hP3N8I1Oq7AMHK0UuDQs= Received: by 10.64.196.9 with SMTP id t9mr4491326qbf.1185523080523; Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:58:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.65.20.6 with HTTP; Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:58:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5f211bd50707270058u5c49f6f2o24c9535654b1ba2c@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:58:00 +0200 From: "Thomas Mueller" To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org Subject: Re: Jackrabbit = Kick Ass Tool (was: Jackrabbit = Big Trouble??) In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi, > the performance is not acceptable... The main problem is > the Cache Manager of JackRabbit resizes which costs uncertain time, > which result the operation very slow sometimes. I am sorry that the CacheManager causes trouble. Resizing caches shouldn't cost time at all (maybe a few milliseconds). If you have a test case where you can show it does actually cost a significant amount of time, could you please post it? > It is not easy to read those codes when debugging Jackrabbit > for performance tuning because I don't think you need to read the codes. To tune Jackrabbit for performance, I usually try to use the Bundle Persistence Manager and disable Search if possible. Do you use a profiling tool to measure performance? If not I suggest to use the YourKit Java Profiler (www.yourkit.com). > there is no document about > the logic behind the index resizing. I have added some documentation about the CacheManager (a big part is copy & paste from the CacheManager Javadocs): http://wiki.apache.org/jackrabbit/CacheManager Please tell me if you need more information about the index resizing. Thomas