tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean-Francois Arcand <jfarc...@apache.org>
Subject Re: cvs commit: jakarta-tomcat-catalina/catalina/src/share/org/apache/catalina/valves ByteBufferAccessLogValve.java mbeans-descriptors.xml
Date Mon, 22 Nov 2004 16:03:00 GMT


Remy Maucherat wrote:
> Jean-Francois Arcand wrote:
> 
>> Without access log valve, we are 20% faster. With the ByteBuffer one, 
>> 13%.
> 
> 
> There are 3 access log valves ;) Maybe you should give a chart.

I did formally benchmark

+ FastCommonAccessLogValve
+ ByteBufferAccessLogValve

I didn't bother about AccessLogValve. I did a lot of exploration:

+ use a ByteBuffer, call ByteBuffer.asCharBuffer() and then use 
CharBuffer.put() (no StringBuffer/ThreadLocal). Works fine except there 
is some garbage in the log since when a CharBuffer view buffer is used 
against a ByteBuffer or using ByteBuffer.putChar(char x) will result in 
'^' (control) characters and null characters to be written to the 
ByteBuffer. These '^' (control) characters then get written to the 
access log.
+ StringBuffer without a ThreadLocal.
+ CharBuffer.allocate() with a ByteBuffer.allocateDirect()

I did also try to synchronize the valve invoke method and use the 
current thread to write the log (instead of using a background 
thread/writter thread).


> 
> I'll do my byte based improvements (to be able to save on char to byte) 
> in your implementation.
> 
> The buffer isn't big enough. 16k will hold 500 requests maximum. If you 
> were afraid of doing one I/O operations, it's bad, as you'll end up 
> doing a lot of I/O synchronously. Can we allow the buffers to grow ?

Yes, but growing a direct byte buffer is very bad. I did put 16k as a 
baseline. Using a 128k will gives better results, but 256k didn't.

  At
> least they would need to be a lot bigger otherwise (we could "reinvest" 
> the memory saved from not having a background thread :) ).
> Another trick if you want to tweak the interval inside the valve, you 
> can use an integer that you increment and do a modulo (i % n). I do that 
> for the manager checks (one check every 6 invocations of 
> backgroundProcess).

Yes, I can explore that. I will re-add the writerThread for now since 
the current implementation doesn't work since the byteBuffer will never 
be flushed. This is temporary. Again, consider this valve as exploration.

-- Jeanfrancois


> 
> Rémy
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> 
> 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message