× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Did you check that all the DNS servers on the problem box are working
correctly. That can cause more performance issues that you can imagine.
Tim

Tim Rowe, [1]timmr@xxxxxxxxxx
Business Architect Application Development & Systems Management for IBM i
IBM i Development Lab, Rochester, MN
(507) 253-6191 (Tie) 553-6191

[2]http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/power/software/i/are/index.html

-----"MIDRANGE-L" <[3]midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: -----
<midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
message: 2
date: Thu, 02 Feb 2017 16:16:54 -0800
from: "James H. H. Lampert" <[4]jamesl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
subject: Re: Got a weird suggestion about a troublesome Tomcat
installation running in a subsystem

On 2/2/17, 12:02 PM, Buck Calabro wrote:

> When you measured the performance of the machine, did anything jump out?

What sort of performance metrics did you have in mind, that would be
specific to this situation?

Unfortunately, what I know about performance tools and metrics,
particularly relevant to this situation, and 50 cents, might buy you a
cup of very bad coffee. Or not.

Could somebody help me relieve my ignorance?

We've switched them to a version of the subsystem without the private
memory pool; response time hasn't changed significantly. Unfortunately,
without the private memory pool, WRKSYSSTS doesn't tell me how the stuff
running in the subsystem is doing on page faults, and so I don't know if
page faults are even a factor here.

The box that's got us scratching our heads on Tomcat/BIRT response time
has 4 type 31F3 4096M main storage cards, while another customer box
that's lightning fast with the same BIRT report running in Tomcat has 2
type 31E8 16384M main storage cards. Our own production box (also close
to lightning fast) has two 31A6 4096M main storage cards.

So the "problem" customer box (a Power 7, I'm told) has exactly twice as
much memory as our box (no more than a Power 6), and exactly half as
much memory as the lightning-fast customer box (a Power 8, I'm told).

Any idea what to try next?

--
JHHL

</midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

References

Visible links
1. mailto:timmr@xxxxxxxxxx
2. http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/power/software/i/are/index.html
3. mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
4. mailto:jamesl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.