Some Java / CF systems I have seen have done well to change the collector in use. Currently you are running -XX:+UseParallelGC which is a throughput GC. Perhaps you can experiment with changing to a low pause GC? Caveat UseParallelGC may be working well for the environment and changing collector might be a retrograde step and could be hard to tell without some JVM logging.
There are other GCâs -XX:+UseParallelOldGC is said to be good for large heaps. For incremental GC (low pause) JVM would look like: java.args=-server -Xms4096m -Xmx8192m -Dsun.io.useCanonCaches=false -XX:PermSize=1024m -XX:MaxPermSize=1024m -Dsun.rmi.dgc.client.gcInterval=150000 -Dsun.rmi.dgc.server.gcInterval=150000 -XX:+ UseParNewGC -Xincgc âXbatch etc HTH again, Carl. > Hi everyone, > > thanks for all the good feedback. > > Let me first tell you WHY I think its a JVM issue, then show you what > results I have had. > > We took the exact same code, and connected it to the exact same DB > (and DB > server) and ran the exact same code in isolation. The comparison was > outstanding about 2s on the old machine and 10s as you have seen on > the new. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:342364 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
