[Rhm-users] Re: [Rhemrg-users-list] RHM Performence

[Carl Trieloff]

I can't comment specifically as I don't know how you have modified the 
example, however...

Some of the differences between the example and perftest is that 
perftest sets a few additional
things. These include flow control, accept mode, and by default is 
aggressive on consumer ack,
etc.

If you are tuning for a specific case, the easiest is play with perftest 
options till you get want you
want and then have a look in the perftest code (it is all in one file) 
on how to set the options. However
I expect you will get to perftest numbers with the above 4 options, I 
have mail you examples
privately.

In the case where you are chaining client, my first quest is that you 
have some logic that is introducing
head of line blocking - just guessing again in absence of detail. 
Another easy way to see how
MRG performs in a chain setup is to configure federation.

regards
Carl.


mark yoffe wrote:
> Hi
>  
> i have been using the system for some and have some quetions regarding 
> performence
>  
> ----
>  1
> -----
> i have used the PerfTest to benchmark the performance 
> and i receive results of around 70,000 transfers per second with the 
> default values (message size 1024, 1 publish , 1 subscribe, etc..)
> with 1 Byte size messages i get around 160K transfers per second
>  
> than i used the request response example privded with the system and 
> changed the message limit to be unlimited
> and tested based on the example a transmission of 100,000 messages - 
> the best time i got was 10 seconds for round trip time
>  
> so if i translate the numbers correctly 100K messages each way is 200K 
> messages total
> which is 20K per seconds not close
>  
> which translates to around 20,000 
>  
>  
> can someone  please explain the differences between the numbers , is 
> there something missing in the request response example to achieve hi 
> performance results?
>  
> --
> 2
> ---
>  
> i have made another experiment using three RHMclients in an experiment
>  
> where one sends a message to the seconds and he second to the third , 
> than the third returns it to the first (1->2->3->1)
>  
> each one employs a similar technique to the request response server 
> from the examples provided with the product
>  
> the results i receive show that the performance is slower than the 
> request - response example
>  
> the change is not linear what took 10 seconds in the first test (point 
> to point and back) now takes more than double the time
> although only one more "communication step"  was added to the scheme
>  
> can someone please explain this behavior? is this correct? should the 
> system behave like this?
>  
> Regards
>  
>  
> Mark Yoffe
>  
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rhemrg-users-list mailing list
> Rhemrg-users-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhemrg-users-list
>   

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/rhm-users/attachments/20080827/1a67958a/attachment.htm>