Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19
  1. #11
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Milano
    Posts
    538
    Are you testing with "Moderato" edition of Lightstramer? Please note that this edition has the limitation of up to 1 update per second for each item.
    In your performance test you should use the "Vivace" edition.

    If you're already using the "Vivace" edition let us know that so we'll investigate further about the configuration of subscription.

  2. #12
    Power Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    182
    I am using Moderato

    I will change and let you know the result.

  3. #13
    Power Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    182
    Yes, changing to Vivace made a huge difference - thanks. A sneeky marketing ploy that we could do with adopting ourselves

  4. #14
    Power Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    182
    Moving on, I am now using Vivace to test with and I an getting fast throughput for a single client.

    However, if I open two browsers (say, one Firefox and one Chrome) and fire off 100 echos simultaneously on each browser, one of the browser sessions hangs until the other one has got all its responses. It is as if the two browsers are both processing data through the same thread on the server. So one does not get any response from the server at all until the first browser session has had all its messages echoed back.

    Clearly I have something misconfigured (or I have coded something incorrectly), because that would be fairly useless in a production environment.

    Any pointers?
    Last edited by kpturner; December 10th, 2012 at 08:44 AM.

  5. #15
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Milano
    Posts
    538
    Hi kpturner,

    The scenario you describe is indeed unexpected; can you post here an extract from the log of the Lightstreamer server after you have set the "LightstreamerLogger.subscriptions" and "LightstreamerLogger.pump" loggers at DEBUG level?
    This will allow us to understand the dynamics between adapter and server, and so identify the bottleneck.

  6. #16
    Power Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    182
    I have changed lightstreamer_log_conf.xml thus:

    <logger name="LightstreamerLogger.subscriptions" level="DEBUG"/>
    <logger name="LightstreamerLogger.pump" level="DEBUG"/>
    but I do not see any debug information in my log
    Have I done it incorrectly?

  7. #17
    Power Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    182
    It would be interesting (for my future reference) to find out why my changes to the logging did not accomplish anything.

    However, I seem to have moved on a little with my perceived "blocking" issue. My stress test was a tight loop in javascript constantly clicking a button to send the message to Lightstreamer. When I changed this to introduce a tiny 1ms time lapse between each click/send, both browsers started to work simultaneously. In other words, I was sending/receiving in both browsers with no blocking. So this tells me that the issue was not with the server at all, but with my own PC processor. In fact, when I switched off DEBUG in my adapter log config it processed the echos reasonably quickly. 5000 echos simultaneously on Firefox and Chrome, with Firefox completing in 30 seconds and Chrome in 25 seconds.

  8. #18
    Power Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Cesano Maderno, Italy
    Posts
    784
    Well, assuming the rest of the file is not changed then your configuration is correct and you should see such debug logging in the log files (NB: the log on the console would not change with such settings as the console -LSConsole- appender is only configured for init and license categories).

    As per the issue with the strict loop, I think that's not a problem with your CPU: please note that JavaScript is mono-thread and that our library executes "commands" (see as an example the sendMessage lifecycle documentation) asynchronously so that if you keep the CPU occupied with a huge loop our library will not have any chance to send the messages to the server as it will receive its share of CPU only when such loop is terminated.

    HTH

  9. #19
    Power Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    182
    I see. I was expecting to see the messages in the console but I can see them in the logs. Thanks.

    Interesting about the loop. I was not expecting it to be an issue between two different browser instances despite the fact that JavaScript is mono-threaded. Thanks for the info.

 

 

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:12 PM.