[Topaz-dev] Mulgara Performance Woes

[Life is hard, and then you die]

On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 02:11:49PM -0800, Russell Uman wrote:
> > > if mulgara is single-threaded, why have 10 maxThreads? why 
> > not 1 or 2?
> > > (i'm sure it's a bad idea, i just don't know why :)
> > 
> > You want a little bit of concurrency because all the 
> > tcp/http/soap processing can proceed in parallel.
> > 
> > But see my other mail on why we can't go this route anyway :-(
> 
> yup :( 
> 
> i went ahead and made a new ticket for this issue - the idea that the
> pub-app should give up gracefully when it's obvious that mulgara is
> under load, so that mulgara has a chance to catch up.
> 
> i have no idea if this is doable from the pub-app side exclusively, or
> if we need changes in OTM or mulgara to support.
> 
> http://www.topazproject.org/trac/ticket/812

Well, you build in the knowledge in the app that mulgara only handles
a single write-tx at a time and therefore lock/serialize all
operations on the app side, but I don't think that's a good idea. I
think the best approach is just to make sure the sessions get closed
quickly - part of the problem currently is the use of http-sessions to
manage state and what appears to be a bug in axis about loosing
cookies on timed out operations, something that should go away in the
next release since we're swithing to RMI.


  Cheers,

  Ronald