[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DISPATCH-957?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16437863#comment-16437863
]
Matthieu Simonin edited comment on DISPATCH-957 at 4/13/18 8:53 PM:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
In attachment the log files of the two qdrouterd.
* router0 is where clients are connected
* router1 is where servers are connected
I ran (conf in attachment):
* {{oo deploy --driver=router g5k}}
* {{oo test_case_1 --nbr_clients=100 --nbr_servers=100 --nbr_calls=1000
--pause=0.1 --timeout 200}}
edit: I forgot to mention that I observed the same behaviour (increased memory
consumption on router1)
was (Author: msimonin):
In attachment the log files of the two qdrouterd.
* router0 is where clients are connected
* router1 is where servers are connected
I ran (conf in attachment):
* {{oo deploy --driver=router g5k}}
* {{oo test_case_1 --nbr_clients=100 --nbr_servers=100 --nbr_calls=1000
--pause=0.1 --timeout 200}}
> Unbalanced memory consumption in a 2 routers configuration and specific
> workload
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DISPATCH-957
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DISPATCH-957
> Project: Qpid Dispatch
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Router Node
> Affects Versions: 1.0.1
> Environment: * At the time I was experimenting, I built the router
> from the source and
> used 22400df dockerized. It's available in docker hub :
> msimonin/qdrouterd:22400df or msimonin/qdrouterd-collectd:22400f
>
> * ombt version used embeds the following library
> oslo.messaging==5.35.0
> pyngus==2.2.2
> python-qpid-proton==0.19.0
>
> * I used ombt-orchestrator to deploy all the stack using the g5k provider
> (see
> https://github.com/msimonin/ombt-orchestrator/) In a local machine setup,
> vagrant provider can be used but I'm not sure if it is reasonnable to scale
> the
> above number of agents. I've attached nevertheless the configuration used.
>
> * Host Linux distribution is debian9
>
>
> Reporter: Matthieu Simonin
> Assignee: Ken Giusti
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: call.png, cast.png, conf.yaml, conf.yaml, inc-calls.png,
> mem_usage.tar.gz, router0.log, router1.log
>
>
> After discussion with Ken Giusti we deem appropriate to fill a bug to track
> the
> following behavior.
> Note also that the exact version used in the following description isn't
> exactly 1.1.0 but one built from source 22400df (master back in february).
> I started two interconnected routers (router0 and router1)
> router0 is where all my consumers connect router1 is where all my producers
> connect .
> The workload is an RPC test using oslo.messaging library using calls
> (resp. casts) : clients keep sending message and block for the response
> (resp. do not block).
> I've attached some observations:
> 1)
> With 100 consumers and 100 producers and calls I observe a higher memory
> consumption of router0 in comparison of the memory consumption of router1 (see
> calls.png). Casts seem to less affect the router memory. Calls usually
> requires
> more ressources because of the return values flowing back to the producer but
> I wouldn't expect this big difference.
> I've attached a tgz in which, you'll find the results of qdtsat -a,-m,-l
> * before the benchmark (start)
> * early during the benchmark (during)
> * late during the benchmark (during-1)
> * after the benchmark completed (after)
> 2) I've run a second test increasing incrementaly the (#clients, #servers) :
> [50, 100, 200, 500] (calls only)
> see inc-calls.png
> in this case the difference of the memory consumption between router0 and
> router1 is [50MB, 100MB, 300MB, 1.5GB]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@qpid.apache.org
