https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #37 from Mark Thomas ---
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8234191
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
-
To
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #36 from Mark Thomas ---
That is the right code.
Testing locally on Linux:
java -showversion org.apache.tomcat.Bug63916NioPoller
openjdk version "1.8.0_222"
OpenJDK Runtime Environment (AdoptOpenJDK)(build 1.8.0_222-b10)
OpenJDK
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #35 from Christopher Schultz ---
(In reply to Michael Osipov from comment #34)
> Awesome, can you retry with Java 8?
This is Oracle 1.8.0_181.
Selector Provider: sun.nio.ch.KQueueSelectorProvider@16e15b65
16,10461
32,5245
64,2696
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #34 from Michael Osipov ---
(In reply to Christopher Schultz from comment #33)
> (In reply to Rainer Jung from comment #23)
> > Plus: performance behavior plus provider string would also be interesting
> > for MacOS.
>
> Some info
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #33 from Christopher Schultz ---
(In reply to Rainer Jung from comment #23)
> Plus: performance behavior plus provider string would also be interesting
> for MacOS.
Some info from MacOS:
$ java -showversion
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #32 from Michael Osipov ---
I am down now to:
$ for file in output/build/logs/*TestNonBlockingAPI* ; do head -2 $file; done
Testsuite: org.apache.catalina.nonblocking.TestNonBlockingAPI
Tests run: 9, Failures: 0, Errors: 0,
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #31 from Mark Thomas ---
Thanks. Missed that. Fixed now.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #30 from Michael Osipov ---
(In reply to Michael Osipov from comment #29)
> (In reply to Mark Thomas from comment #28)
> > Fixed in:
> > - master for 9.0.28 onwards
> > - 8.5.x for 8.5.48 onwards
>
> I see now
>
> $ for file in
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #29 from Michael Osipov ---
(In reply to Mark Thomas from comment #28)
> Fixed in:
> - master for 9.0.28 onwards
> - 8.5.x for 8.5.48 onwards
I see now
$ for file in output/build/logs/*TestNonBlockingAPI* ; do head -2 $file; done
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
Mark Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #27 from Mark Thomas ---
I have been mixing up socket.txBufSize and socket.appWriteBufSize.
My testing shows that socket.appWriteBufSize has no measurable impact on
performance of the stand-alone test.
Performance of the
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #26 from Michael Osipov ---
A local change to Tomcat master:
> diff --git a/test/org/apache/catalina/nonblocking/TestNonBlockingAPI.java
> b/test/org/apache/catalina/nonblocking/TestNonBlockingAPI.java
> index
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #25 from Michael Osipov ---
Here are new test results, is the terminal/consumer (telnet) too slow?
For both: telnet localhost > /dev/null
FreeBSD:
All telnet output has been redirected to /dev/null.
default: Writing 10MB
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #24 from Michael Osipov ---
(In reply to Rainer Jung from comment #22)
> According to the Javadoc, the Selector has various impls and is encapsulated
> via a SelectorProvider. The chosen provider decides about which system api
> is
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #23 from Rainer Jung ---
Plus: performance behavior plus provider string would also be interesting for
MacOS.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #22 from Rainer Jung ---
According to the Javadoc, the Selector has various impls and is encapsulated
via a SelectorProvider. The chosen provider decides about which system api is
being used (poll, epoll, event ports, kqueue, ...).
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #21 from Michael Osipov ---
New test results:
RHEL:
8 KiB: Writing 10MB took [1601] milliseconds; nothing added
default: Writing 10MB took [1176] milliseconds
HP-UX:
8 KiB: Writing 10MB took [89460] milliseconds; add 68 ms for
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #20 from Remy Maucherat ---
With NIO2, when I set a really low send buffer (I tried as low as 32 bytes) it
does change what the read/write logs from TestNonBlockingAPI look like as
expected, but the "performance" does not go down
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #19 from Mark Thomas ---
Hmm. No change at all with a Executor. The cut-off for buffer size between good
and bad performance is still exactly 4537 bytes. That doesn't match with what I
thought was going on.
--
You are receiving
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #18 from Mark Thomas ---
Tomcat is calling write until 0 bytes are written before adding to the poller
so that isn't what is going on here.
(In reply to Remy Maucherat from comment #12)
> By default on my Linux the socket send
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #17 from Michael Osipov ---
(In reply to Mark Thomas from comment #14)
> I think I have a fix. I've updated the test to keep writing until the
> non-blocking write returns 0 bytes written and only then add the connection
> to the
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #16 from Michael Osipov ---
(In reply to Remy Maucherat from comment #15)
> The performance numbers would still indicate FreeBSD has a specific poller
> issue of some kind though, the difference is too large there.
I will inquire
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #15 from Remy Maucherat ---
The performance numbers would still indicate FreeBSD has a specific poller
issue of some kind though, the difference is too large there.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #14 from Mark Thomas ---
I think I have a fix. I've updated the test to keep writing until the
non-blocking write returns 0 bytes written and only then add the connection to
the Poller. Performance is back to normal for me even
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #13 from Michael Osipov ---
(In reply to Mark Thomas from comment #11)
> Simpler test case that reproduces the issue
>
> https://github.com/markt-asf/tomcat-bugs/blob/master/src/java/org/apache/
> tomcat/Bug63916NioPoller.java
>
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #12 from Remy Maucherat ---
By default on my Linux the socket send buffer size is 2304. For NIO to have the
same "performance" and behavior running the test [as seen with the debug logs]
as NIO2, the send buffer size needs to be
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #11 from Mark Thomas ---
Simpler test case that reproduces the issue
https://github.com/markt-asf/tomcat-bugs/blob/master/src/java/org/apache/tomcat/Bug63916NioPoller.java
Run the test case and connect with telnet to localhost
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #10 from Mark Thomas ---
No, the Linux performance is not what I expect. There is something wrong here.
I'm going to build a simple test case to demonstrate it.
FreeBSD has the same issue but the pause before select() returns is
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #9 from Michael Osipov ---
(In reply to Mark Thomas from comment #8)
> I see some timing differences on Linux, but not as extreme.
>
> For one test testNonBlockingWriteWithKeepAlive
>
> NIO: 55s
> APR: 8s
>
> The NIO slowness
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #8 from Mark Thomas ---
I see some timing differences on Linux, but not as extreme.
For one test testNonBlockingWriteWithKeepAlive
NIO: 55s
APR: 8s
The NIO slowness is caused by the non-blocking write. The test does a large
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #7 from Mark Thomas ---
I'm starting to look at this.
How are you installing Java on FreeBSD? From the ports?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #6 from Michael Osipov ---
Created attachment 36880
--> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36880=edit
JStack dump 2
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #5 from Michael Osipov ---
Created attachment 36879
--> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36879=edit
JStack dump
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #2 from Michael Osipov ---
Created attachment 36876
--> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36876=edit
Test with APR
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #3 from Michael Osipov ---
Created attachment 36877
--> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36877=edit
Test with NIO
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
--- Comment #4 from Michael Osipov ---
Created attachment 36878
--> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36878=edit
Test with NIO2
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63916
Michael Osipov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||micha...@apache.org
--- Comment #1
37 matches
Mail list logo
