But I'm not sure it would show as a disk bottleneck. If you have
frequent small writes to a disk and each write is delayed while
antivirus checks the datastream for virus signatures, the many tiny
delays could aggegate in to a much bigger file i/o slow down. The
system may experience a higher CPU load rather than a disk bottleneck.
--David
Frank Niedermann wrote:
David,
that is a good idea from far, far away :-)
Antivirus is enabled (I'm not suicidal, this is a Windows box ;) but
according to the Windows performance viewer there is no bottleneck on the
harddisk, it's always way under 10% load.
Frank
David Smith-2 wrote:
I think a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away I remember something
about antivirus impacting file I/O performance. Would your box happen
to have antivirus enabled? If so, any chance you could exclude your
logs from it and/or disable it for the purpose of a test?
--David
Frank Niedermann wrote:
Unfortunately I have to use Windows Server 2003 as the company behind the
application we're using is not supporting UNIX/Linux.
Windows also has performance utilities but they tell me that the server
isn't heavily loaded at all.
A good think would be to have a smaller access log just for statistics,
like
only one line per user access and not every file which transferred to the
user (html, images, js and so on) ...
Frank
Tim Funk wrote:
Something seems odd with your system. I have pounded some tomcat
installations with old unix hardware with and without access logging and
could hardly tell the difference.
In linux - i was able to tell more of a difference, but not enough to
turn off logging.
I am at a loss of where the bottleneck is. If your using *nix - your
system should have some OS benchmarking to see disk utilization or other
potential bottlenecks.
Good luck.
-Tim
Frank Niedermann wrote:
I've installed LambdaProbe and it tells me that there are not much
Threads
(about 50) and most of them are in state of waiting or timed_waiting. So
that seems to be okay - but what if Tomcat sent the response to the
first
user request and then does the logging, while the next request or other
users are waiting?
And this:
The log files are under 20 MB, that should be fine, shoundn't it? The
disk
is way far from beeing full and it's a RAID1 with SCSI disks so they
should
have enough performance.
I'm now totally unsure if I should enable access.log-files (to have
statistics with AWstats) or disable them (to have more performance) ...
Frank
Frank Niedermann wrote:
Tim,
Tim Funk wrote:
Unless you are max'd on working threads - access logging should not be
a
performance hit. Access logging takes pace after the response is sent
to
the client.
BUT if the access logs are big, AND you a re low on disk, AND/OR your
disk is SLOOOOW then that could be a problem. The overhead of logging
the access log is pretty low.
The log files are under 20 MB, that should be fine, shoundn't it? The
disk
is way far from beeing full and it's a RAID1 with SCSI disks so they
should
have enough performance.
I'm now totally unsure if I should enable access.log-files (to have
statistics with AWstats) or disable them (to have more performance) ...
Frank
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
