Include profile option when executing mvn #93
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
In order to fix waarp#92, profile to use should be explicitly specified when executing Maven. Reorder options and phases to specify options first to follow `mvn --help` documentation. Also include Maven version to use to be coherent with `releasing.md`.
|
I agree. We will take this in the next release ! Thank you! |
fredericBregier
added a commit
to fredericBregier/Waarp-All
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 27, 2021
- LocalExec increase thread possibility - Change minimal / maximal threads for retrieve - Increase runlimit to 50 000 - Improve Client Thread / Server Thread - Add Benchmark tests on Multiple Server - Fix issue waarp#90 on Oracle JDBC driver from Maven Central inspired from Pull Request waarp#92 - Fix issue waarp#92 on profile option description in README.md, inspired from Pull Request waarp#93 Results: - Loop Benchmarks gives on 2 cores (4 threads) with 2 Waarp Servers, 1 with PostgreSQL as Container, 1 with H2 Database on the same server - TLS efficiency: up to 84 trasfers/second - No TLS efficiency: up to 103 transfers/second - Dual Waarp servers (using 1 core for Network) on the same 2 cores with the same PostgreSQL Database as Container and Filesystem with one Client on the same server - 1 server: 42 transfers/second with 75% CPU usage and 90 Mbps - 2 servers: 66 transfers/second, so 57% more with 100% CPU usage and 142 Mbps - Note on benchmark: - Numbers are lower than loop Benchmark since clients are in a lot of concurrent client threads, therefore having difficulties to have high concurrency on client side and much more CPU activities due to 2000 threads - Difference between 1 and 2 servers is low since all are running on the same host, using in 2 servers case 100% CPU, while 75% in 1 server case, therefore the efficiency is not fully visible since there is not enough CPU available but still 57% more. One can expect at least 90% of linearity (almost doubling if we were using 2 different hosts for both servers in the same cluster).
fredericBregier
added a commit
to fredericBregier/Waarp-All
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 10, 2021
- LocalExec increase thread possibility - Change minimal / maximal threads for retrieve - Increase runlimit to 50 000 - Improve Client Thread / Server Thread - Add Benchmark tests on Multiple Server - Fix issue on Oracle JDBC driver from Maven Central inspired from Pull Request waarp#92 - Fix issue waarp#91 on profile option description in README.md, inspired from Pull Request waarp#93 - Add also option to Gateway FTP to specify if PASSIVE and ACTIVE modes are accepted: - in <limit> <activepassive>n</activepassive> where -1 = passive, 1 = active, 0 = both Results: *Waarp R66 Benchmarks* 4 core 16 GB RAM: only 1 host - Loop Benchmarks : 2 Waarp Servers, 1 with PostgreSQL as Container, 1 with H2 Database on the same server with 2000 files of size average of 250 KB - TLS efficiency: up to 84 trasfers/second - No TLS efficiency: up to 103 transfers/second - Dual Waarp servers on the same host with the same PostgreSQL Database as Container and Filesystem with one Client on the same server with 4000 concurrent transferts of size average of 250 KB - 1 server: 42 transfers/second with 75% CPU usage and 90 Mbps - 2 servers: 66 transfers/second, so 57% more with 100% CPU usage and 142 Mbps - Note on benchmark: - Numbers are lower than loop Benchmark since clients are in a lot of concurrent client threads, therefore having difficulties to have high concurrency on client side and much more CPU activities due to 2000 threads - Difference between 1 and 2 servers is low since all are running on the same host, using in 2 servers case 100% CPU, while 75% in 1 server case, therefore the efficiency is not fully visible since there is not enough CPU available but still 57% more. One can expect at least 90% of linearity (almost doubling if we were using 2 different hosts for both servers in the same cluster). 8 core 16 GB RAM: only one host - Loop: with 2000 files of size average of 250 KB - TLS 367/s 80% CPU - NoTLS 418/s 75% CPU - Dual Waarp servers with 4000 concurrent transferts of size average of 250 KB - 2 TLS: 133/s 80% CPU - 2 NoTLS: 184/s 65% CPU - 1 NoTLS: 135/s 60% CPU *Gateway FTP Server benchmark* - 8 threads (4 core), 16 GB Memory - Single FTP client - Using Waarp FTP client (based on FTP4J): with 1KB file - Passive: 440 transfers/s - Active: 480 transfers/s
fredericBregier
added a commit
to fredericBregier/Waarp-All
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 10, 2021
- LocalExec increase thread possibility - Change minimal / maximal threads for retrieve - Increase runlimit to 50 000 - Improve Client Thread / Server Thread - Add Benchmark tests on Multiple Server - Fix issue on Oracle JDBC driver from Maven Central inspired from Pull Request waarp#92 - Fix issue waarp#91 on profile option description in README.md, inspired from Pull Request waarp#93 - Add also option to Gateway FTP to specify if PASSIVE and ACTIVE modes are accepted: - in <limit> <activepassive>n</activepassive> where -1 = passive, 1 = active, 0 = both Results: *Waarp R66 Benchmarks* 4 core 16 GB RAM: only 1 host - Loop Benchmarks : 2 Waarp Servers, 1 with PostgreSQL as Container, 1 with H2 Database on the same server with 2000 files of size average of 250 KB - TLS efficiency: up to 84 trasfers/second - No TLS efficiency: up to 103 transfers/second - Dual Waarp servers on the same host with the same PostgreSQL Database as Container and Filesystem with one Client on the same server with 4000 concurrent transferts of size average of 250 KB - 1 server: 42 transfers/second with 75% CPU usage and 90 Mbps - 2 servers: 66 transfers/second, so 57% more with 100% CPU usage and 142 Mbps - Note on benchmark: - Numbers are lower than loop Benchmark since clients are in a lot of concurrent client threads, therefore having difficulties to have high concurrency on client side and much more CPU activities due to 2000 threads - Difference between 1 and 2 servers is low since all are running on the same host, using in 2 servers case 100% CPU, while 75% in 1 server case, therefore the efficiency is not fully visible since there is not enough CPU available but still 57% more. One can expect at least 90% of linearity (almost doubling if we were using 2 different hosts for both servers in the same cluster). 8 core 16 GB RAM: only one host - Loop: with 2000 files of size average of 250 KB - TLS 367/s 80% CPU - NoTLS 418/s 75% CPU - Dual Waarp servers with 4000 concurrent transferts of size average of 250 KB - 2 TLS: 133/s 80% CPU - 2 NoTLS: 184/s 65% CPU - 1 NoTLS: 135/s 60% CPU *Gateway FTP Server benchmark* - 8 threads (4 core), 16 GB Memory - Single FTP client - Using Waarp FTP client (based on FTP4J): with 1KB file - Passive: 440 transfers/s - Active: 480 transfers/s
Merged
|
This will be integrated within 3.6.0. |
fredericBregier
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 18, 2021
- LocalExec increase thread possibility - Change minimal / maximal threads for retrieve - Increase runlimit to 50 000 - Improve Client Thread / Server Thread - Add Benchmark tests on Multiple Server - Fix issue on Oracle JDBC driver from Maven Central inspired from Pull Request #92 - Fix issue #91 on profile option description in README.md, inspired from Pull Request #93 - Add also option to Gateway FTP to specify if PASSIVE and ACTIVE modes are accepted: - in <limit> <activepassive>n</activepassive> where -1 = passive, 1 = active, 0 = both Results: *Waarp R66 Benchmarks* 4 core 16 GB RAM: only 1 host - Loop Benchmarks : 2 Waarp Servers, 1 with PostgreSQL as Container, 1 with H2 Database on the same server with 2000 files of size average of 250 KB - TLS efficiency: up to 84 trasfers/second - No TLS efficiency: up to 103 transfers/second - Dual Waarp servers on the same host with the same PostgreSQL Database as Container and Filesystem with one Client on the same server with 4000 concurrent transferts of size average of 250 KB - 1 server: 42 transfers/second with 75% CPU usage and 90 Mbps - 2 servers: 66 transfers/second, so 57% more with 100% CPU usage and 142 Mbps - Note on benchmark: - Numbers are lower than loop Benchmark since clients are in a lot of concurrent client threads, therefore having difficulties to have high concurrency on client side and much more CPU activities due to 2000 threads - Difference between 1 and 2 servers is low since all are running on the same host, using in 2 servers case 100% CPU, while 75% in 1 server case, therefore the efficiency is not fully visible since there is not enough CPU available but still 57% more. One can expect at least 90% of linearity (almost doubling if we were using 2 different hosts for both servers in the same cluster). 8 core 16 GB RAM: only one host - Loop: with 2000 files of size average of 250 KB - TLS 367/s 80% CPU - NoTLS 418/s 75% CPU - Dual Waarp servers with 4000 concurrent transferts of size average of 250 KB - 2 TLS: 133/s 80% CPU - 2 NoTLS: 184/s 65% CPU - 1 NoTLS: 135/s 60% CPU *Gateway FTP Server benchmark* - 8 threads (4 core), 16 GB Memory - Single FTP client - Using Waarp FTP client (based on FTP4J): with 1KB file - Passive: 440 transfers/s - Active: 480 transfers/s
|
Included in v3.6.0 in an adapated version |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In order to fix #92, profile to use should be explicitly specified when executing Maven.
Reorder options and phases to specify options first to follow
mvn --helpdocumentation.Also include Maven version to use to be coherent with
releasing.md.