×
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.
Running the 32-bit JVM with Tomcat has made a big difference in the past for me.
Regards,
Richard Schoen | Director of Document Management Technologies, HelpSystems
T: + 1 952-486-6802
RJS Software Systems | A Division of HelpSystems
richard.schoen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.rjssoftware.com
Visit me on: Twitter | LinkedIn
------------------------------
message: 2
date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 16:34:03 -0400
from: Buck Calabro <kc2hiz@xxxxxxxxx>
subject: Re: Resources for improving Java performance on midrange
boxes?
On 10/28/2015 2:51 PM, Jack Woehr wrote:
It seems to me, and perhaps someone can correct me, that going to all
this trouble to run Tomcat on something like a P*n* under i5 OS where
resources are so much more dollar expensive than on an $800 blade, is
a waste of engineering and capital.
I might have a different situation to yours. I just upgraded from a Power 7 to a Power 8 and the new box is very underutilised. Instead of paying (cheap) money for another server, it seems to me that it's more cost effective to use the cycles I'm already paying for but not using.
Everything a J2EE application needs can be slurped over from the i5 OS
server via JTOpen. Why waste highend server cycles? Is running Tomcat
under i5 OS a reasonable proposition, or an exercise in OCD?
:)
I thought Tomcat was easy when I last ran it on a Power 5. I'd bet my Power 8 wouldn't even notice it. But the Tomcat load is only part of the story; there's some Java application that wants Tomcat, and it's that Java app which will be the larger workload, I'd think.
To the OP, Java likes more memory than we are accustomed to giving RPG programs.
midrange.com
