Florin, I'm not sure what you mean when you say "apache talke with ofbiz instances via AJP rather than mod_jk". I thought mod_jk used AJP.
I would be interested if you find that AJP is a bottleneck. We use a configuration with Apache on the front end and ofbiz on behind it. We use mod_jk because it has a nice load balancer feature. We have also used mod_proxy which doesn't use AJP but we haven't done any performance testing to compare the differences between the two. Brett On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Florin Popa <[email protected]>wrote: > I'll take a look ar Grinder, seems promising, thanks again. > > Of course life is never easy :) now I have another problem... the network > admin configured 2 ofbiz instances having an apache in front of them as > balancer.. but apache "talks" with ofbiz instances via AJP rather than > mod_jk ..which seems to be a bottleneck.. > Have you experienced that kind of things? > > best regards, > Florin Popa > > > > The Grinder is a nice tool for such things (and has a nice recording >> proxy). >> >> BTW, make sure to set your HTTP and thread pool sizes adequately for the >> load you are planning on. >> >> -David >> >> >> On Jan 28, 2010, at 11:30 AM, Florin Popa wrote: >> >> >> >>> Thanks everyone for the help! >>> >>> Today we succeeded port to geronimo transaction 2.1 as well as the switch >>> from minerva to DBCP connection pool. It seems much better but I am not >>> fully content :) >>> Maybe because the automated testing tool I am using can not really hit >>> hard enough.. >>> >>> Any recommendation for such tools? >>> >>> >>> Of course upgrade to latest version was scheduled too but this would take >>> longer.. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Florin >>> >>> >>>> You're using a quite old version of OFBiz with the Minerva connection >>>> pool (I can tell from the stack trace you sent earlier). The Minerva >>>> connection pool has some issues with resetting connections when there are >>>> errors, especially if there is any code that doesn't manage errors well, >>>> but >>>> also if there are network layer issues or other sorts of things... it just >>>> doesn't recover at all. >>>> >>>> You could try making changes to use the Apache DBCP connection pool that >>>> we use now in OFBiz. To do so requires some low-level coding. You can look >>>> at the current code base for hints, but there is still some work. >>>> >>>> There are no known workarounds to this issue for really high volume >>>> sites, and for low-medium volume sites the workaround was to restart the >>>> app >>>> server(s) every day. >>>> >>>> -David >>>> >>>> >>>> On Jan 27, 2010, at 3:01 PM, Florin Popa wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> I was just asking myself if someone encountered before such problems on >>>>> older revisions.. >>>>> >>>>> Would be Geronimo ok to be used or shall I try something else? >>>>> >>>>> regards, >>>>> Florin >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> I'm sorry the potential for problems with this approach is just too >>>>>> large for me to be able to help you through it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> Scott >>>>>> >>>>>> HotWax Media >>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com >>>>>> >>>>>> On 27/01/2010, at 1:53 PM, Florin Popa wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> The attempt to update Ofbiz to recent revision is for the moment >>>>>>> (time limits) not possible.. there are so many differences... I am even >>>>>>> not >>>>>>> sure if bsh could work further instead of the newly groovy ?! ....also >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> entity layer handling.. etc >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So what I tried was to back port the transaction management - latest >>>>>>> attempt is attached >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> > >
