Ejabberd resource tests/try 5: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (→Memory use) |
|||
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
=== Memory use vs connections === |
=== Memory use vs connections === |
||
This shows max-median-min values for stable points along the way. |
This shows max-median-min values for stable points along the way. (Where the readings appear to stack up on each other, the number of connections varies by one or so). |
||
[[Image:try5-resident_mem_min_per_conn-resident_mem_max_per_conn-resident_mem_median_per_conn.png]] |
[[Image:try5-resident_mem_min_per_conn-resident_mem_max_per_conn-resident_mem_median_per_conn.png]] |
||
=== CPU usage === |
=== CPU usage === |
Revision as of 03:08, 4 November 2008
Try 5: a few hundred users, interacting properly
It turns out that in the hyperactivity agents were not interacting in Ejabberd resource tests/try 4.
For this test several hyperactivity instances were used, each running 50 clients. 4 XO laptops were also connected, so the total number of clients was at most stages 50n + 4.
Memory use
Here you can see the memory use is slightly over 1 MB per user, and growth is approximately linear or slightly in excess thereof. The server has 1GB of ram.
Memory use vs connections
This shows max-median-min values for stable points along the way. (Where the readings appear to stack up on each other, the number of connections varies by one or so).
CPU usage
Cumulative CPU use by the ejabberd process:
Load averages, by connections and by time:
The laptops
Note that they all see a different number of clients.