Hi Charles,
Here's the debug info. I've replaced the full path of spectra root and
webroot to [spectra-root] and 'lowercased'
everything to hopefully shorten the length of the template paths (instead of
c:\program files\allaire\spectra etc). Hope this
doesn't wrap too badly.
10 ms
[spectra-root]\customtags\system\coapi\objectstore\cfa_objecttypeget.cfm
0 ms [spectra-root]\customtags\system\coapi\utils\cfa_entityconstants.cfm
10 ms
[spectra-root]\customtags\system\coapi\utils\cfa_generatedcontentcache.cfm
40 ms [spectra-root]\customtags\system\coapi\utils\cfa_handler.cfm
0 ms [spectra-root]\customtags\system\coapi\utils\cfa_serversettingsget.cfm
0 ms [spectra-root]\customtags\system\coapi\utils\cfa_structget.cfm
90 ms [spectra-root]\customtags\system\coapi\utils\cfa_tagdebugbegin.cfm
20 ms [spectra-root]\customtags\system\coapi\utils\cfa_tagdebugend.cfm
20 ms
[spectra-root]\customtags\system\tier0\objectstore\cfa_contentobject.cfm
10 ms
[spectra-root]\customtags\system\tier0\objectstore\cfa_contentobjectget.cfm
30 ms
[spectra-root]\customtags\system\tier0\objectstore\cfa_contentobjectgetmulti
ple.cfm
0 ms
[spectra-root]\customtags\system\tier0\objectstore\cfa_contentobjectinvokeme
thod.cfm
20 ms
[spectra-root]\customtags\system\tier0\objectstore\_contentobjectgetmultiple
_bp.cfm
0 ms
[spectra-root]\customtags\system\tier1\application\cfa_applicationinitialize
.cfm
10 ms
[spectra-root]\customtags\system\tier1\publishing\cfa_checkschedule.cfm
30 ms [spectra-root]\customtags\system\tier1\publishing\cfa_container.cfm
21 ms [spectra-root]\customtags\system\tier1\publishing\cfa_executerule.cfm
0 ms [spectra-root]\customtags\system\tier1\publishing\cfa_getdescriptor.cfm
0 ms
[spectra-root]\customtags\system\tier1\publishing\cfa_processdescriptor.cfm
20 ms [spectra-root]\customtags\system\tier1\sitemodeling\cfa_page.cfm
20 ms [spectra-root]\customtags\system\tier1\utils\cfa_globalsettings.cfm
20 ms [spectra-root]\handlers\sb\article\displaycatandtitle.cfm
10 ms [spectra-root]\handlers\sb\news\display.cfm
0 ms [spectra-root]\handlers\sb\sectionintro\display.cfm
0 ms [spectra-root]\rules\system\schedulecontent.cfm
0 ms [webroot]\application.cfm
10 ms [webroot]\welcome.cfm
Regards
CK Ng
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Teague" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2000 7:55 PM
Subject: RE: (Extremely) Bad CF/Spectra Performance
> Makes sense in a shared environment (I was being narrow minded!). Looks
> like very simple display handlers- I would expect it to be faster unless
> something unusual is going on- Can you post the whole exploded debugging
> list of templates? lets make sure its not doing work that it doesn't need
to
> . . .
>
> -c
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2000 10:54 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: (Extremely) Bad CF/Spectra Performance
>
>
> Hi Charles,
>
> While I agree that CPU usage is a good thing, I don't think 100% all the
> time is acceptable. Our server
> has to serve other sites too, not just one. If one Spectra app takes 100%
of
> the CPU, the rest of our
> sites are going to suffer. Right now, my simultaneous requests setting is
> set to 6.
>
> My display handlers are rather simple. Just something like this:-
>
> <cfa_handler object="news">
> <cfoutput><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2>
> <b>#news.date#</b> : #news.text#
> </font>
> <p>
> </cfoutput>
> </cfa_handler>
>
> That's the only handler I used on the pages I load tested. Can't get too
> much simpler, can it? :)
>
> Regards
> CK Ng
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Charles Teague" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2000 10:59 PM
> Subject: RE: (Extremely) Bad CF/Spectra Performance
>
>
> > I think usage of the CPU is actually a good thing- the server should be
> > using as much CPU as it can every request- this is how it gets the
lowest
> > response time for any given request. Ideally, I would think that you
> should
> > tune the number of threads to maximize the amount of time that your
server
> > spends using its CPUs to capacity- at a certain point, too many threads
> will
> > result in inefficient usage of CPU b/c of context switching.
> >
> > Judging by the debugging info- its going to be tough to get the below
> > templates to run much faster- you might be able to share 10 milliseconds
> > here or there. How complex are your handlers themselves?
> >
> > -c
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2000 6:37 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: (Extremely) Bad CF/Spectra Performance
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thanks for the reply. To add more to my initial post, the pages I load
> > tested consist of 1 page with 3 containers (my main page),
> > and about 10 'static' pages generated from a CF template which contained
> no
> > CF/Spectra tags. Just plain HTML.
> > Without caching, the main page took 270ms to execute. The rest executed
in
> > 30ms or so. With 100 simultaneous users hitting
> > this (and other pages) on my test machine, response time grew to an
> average
> > of 20s. Which is unacceptable. With caching
> > turned on, average page response time dropped to 5s, pretty good, but I
> lose
> > the ability to do things like personalization.
> >
> > The area in which I get minimal or no improvement whether caching was on
> is
> > in the CPU utlization. In both cases, CPU utilization
> > easily hit 100% when I load tested it with more than 25-30 users, while
> > response time was still below 10s. According to the detailed
> > view of the execution time in the debug info, the following took a
> > comparitively long time to complete.
> >
> > 50 ms C:\PROGRAM
> > FILES\ALLAIRE\SPECTRA\CUSTOMTAGS\SYSTEM\COAPI\UTILS\CFA_HANDLER.CFM
> > 40 ms C:\PROGRAM
> >
>
FILES\ALLAIRE\SPECTRA\CUSTOMTAGS\SYSTEM\TIER0\OBJECTSTORE\CFA_CONTENTOBJECTG
> > ETMULTIPLE.CFM
> > 41 ms C:\PROGRAM
> >
>
FILES\ALLAIRE\SPECTRA\CUSTOMTAGS\SYSTEM\TIER0\OBJECTSTORE\CFA_CONTENTOBJECTI
> > NVOKEMETHOD.CFM
> > 20 ms C:\PROGRAM
> >
>
FILES\ALLAIRE\SPECTRA\CUSTOMTAGS\SYSTEM\TIER0\OBJECTSTORE\_CONTENTOBJECTGETM
> > ULTIPLE_BP.CFM
> > 20 ms C:\PROGRAM
> >
FILES\ALLAIRE\SPECTRA\CUSTOMTAGS\SYSTEM\TIER1\PUBLISHING\CFA_CONTAINER.CFM
> > 20 ms C:\PROGRAM
> > FILES\ALLAIRE\SPECTRA\CUSTOMTAGS\SYSTEM\TIER1\SITEMODELING\CFA_PAGE.CFM
> > 20 ms C:\PROGRAM
> >
FILES\ALLAIRE\SPECTRA\CUSTOMTAGS\SYSTEM\TIER1\UTILS\CFA_GLOBALSETTINGS.CFM
> > 20 ms C:\PROGRAM FILES\ALLAIRE\SPECTRA\RULES\SYSTEM\SCHEDULECONTENT.CFM
> >
> > Can the experts here let me in on some tips I can further optimize the
> > system? As of now, I only use default rule handlers, and my
> > display handlers do nothing more than display. No other handlers are
> called
> > when the pages are called. I hope to get the CPU utilization as low as
> > possible.
> >
> > Thanks in advance.
> >
> > Regards
> > CK Ng
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Kym Kovan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 9:08 PM
> > Subject: Re: (Extremely) Bad CF/Spectra Performance
> >
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > You are worried about performance of CF/Spectra. You state your
machine
> > > specs etc., which is good, but don't give us an indication of what mix
> of
> > > CF and Spectra the site is composed of so may I take a liberty or two
> and
> > > ask a few questions and propose an answer or two that might not quite
> fit
> > > your scene, if so, apologies. May I also say that I wear two hats, the
> > > senior partner in both a Spectra development firm with several sites
> under
> > > our belt and/or in development and also senior partner in a specialist
> > > hosting firm that hosts nothing but CF and Spectra Sites. I say that
to
> > > indicate a level of experience and knowledge :-)
> > >
> > > CF is in the same area as ASP in speed of serving, you can work out
> > special
> > > benchmarks that prove either to be faster but basically they are much
> the
> > > same. Spectra is a whole different ball game, you cannot compare
Spectra
> > to
> > > ASP. Spectra is really a very fancy set of custom tags, written to be
> > > independent of almost everything in terms of platform and potential
> > > database engine. As such they are a very badly performing set of tags
on
> > > any specific platform. They do things like storing all the data of an
> > > object type you design in a WDDX packet that then gets stored in the
> > > database. Great for portability and making the object design
> > > data-independent, disastrous in terms of performance.
> > >
> > > The result, Spectra runs like a dog.
> > >
> > > What you gain is an ability to design an extremely complex site with
> speed
> > > and accuracy and later on, versatility in maintaining the site.
Spectra
> is
> > > for complex sites, the maintenance aspect is a very important one.
> > >
> > > So what do you do about it? Firstly get a fairly grunty machine as a
> base
> > > level machine for serving. All our Spectra servers are dual cpu
> machines,
> > > 512MB or 1GB RAM, UW2 SCSI, etc. That is barely enough. So secondly
work
> > > out what mix of Spectra and CF you want to use. We use direct CF
engines
> > > for query intensive areas of a site, such as a product catalogue, and
> keep
> > > Spectra in the background, managing it all. Thirdly cache
_everything_.
> > You
> > > state that you get minimal performance improvement with caching, that
> > > indicates that something is wrong, fully caching a Spectra page should
> > give
> > > you better performance than even a CF page, we get either 20ms per
page
> > > served or about 80ms depending on cache style etc., compared with 20 -
> 30
> > > secs for a fully dynamic page with 30 containers or so.
> > >
> > > Do you use security in your pages? SiteMinder is an embarrassment, we
> run
> > > our own home-brew security, like most other folks, as it is so
> > slowwwwwww...
> > >
> > > Is the performance problem across the whole site or just the back or
> front
> > > ends? Keep the front end as simple as possible, don't make the
> containers
> > > work too hard with fancy methods, etc. Put more smarts in the backend.
> > > Don't use the webtop, roll your own backend.
> > >
> > >
> > > I could rattle on for ever, tell us where things are slow and we, the
> List
> > > that is <g>, can advise.
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Yours,
> > >
> > > Kym
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----
> > > To Unsubscribe visit
> >
>
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/spectra_talk
> > or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> > 'unsubscribe' in the body.
> > >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > --
> > To Unsubscribe visit
> >
>
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/spectra_talk
> > or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> > 'unsubscribe' in the body.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
> > To Unsubscribe visit
>
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/spectra_talk
> or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> 'unsubscribe' in the body.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --
> To Unsubscribe visit
>
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/spectra_talk
> or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> 'unsubscribe' in the body.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> To Unsubscribe visit
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/spectra_talk
or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
'unsubscribe' in the body.
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Unsubscribe visit
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/spectra_talk or send a
message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
