stephan.lux wrote:
> 
> Sure, the performance is suffering if you do a lot of xml conversions, but
> in this cas I only use a small 300 byte xml file and the xslt
> transformation only copies the content into a new cover. 
> 
> The blocking ressource is the system memory,  512 MB is not enough on
> windows. Has anyone run some loadtests on unix/linux with more than 5000
> jobs? How many memory was used? 
> 
> Cheers 
> Stephan 
> 
> 
> gnodet wrote:
>> 
>> ServiceMix performance mainly depends on the processing performed,
>> either directly or indirectly (scripting may be slower than java, lots
>> of xml conversions ...).
>> Make sure the log level is set to INFO or more.
>> And also make sure your CPU is used at 100%, else it means
>> there is a blocking resource (number of threads, IO ...)
>> 
>> On 12/29/06, stephan.lux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> stephan.lux wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Hi Guillaume,
>>> >
>>> > I have now all of your tipps applied and rerun the test with 5.000
>>> jobs.
>>> > It failes again this out of memory messages and the processing stops.
>>> So I
>>> > have seperated the service assemblies on two boxes with each 512MB of
>>> RAM
>>> > for Service Mix. On one maschine once again out of memory messages are
>>> > thrown, but the most of the jobs could be processed. So it seams, that
>>> the
>>> > script component needs a lot of memory...
>>> >
>>> > But for the processing servicemix needs round about 8 hours! That is
>>> not
>>> > realy acceptable for us, so do you have any more tuning tipps for me?
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://www.nabble.com/Severe-issues-while-load-testing-tf2845236s12049.html#a8088779
>>> Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>>
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Cheers,
>> Guillaume Nodet
>> 
>> 
> 


-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Severe-issues-while-load-testing-tf2845236s12049.html#a8122637
Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Reply via email to