Is there a limit to the number of Composer Workspaces that can be supported by a single jazz server?
approx year and half ago we were told there was a limit to the number of Workspace that could exist on a single Composer Jazz Server... Is there still a limit? if so, how many work spaces it the maximun? Also, is there a limit on the number of "concurrent users" that can be supported by a single Composer Jazz Server? |
4 answers
There is no known theoretical limit for either, but there likely are practical limits. The RM performance team tested with particular profiles that are described in these articles in the jazz.net library, which were published earlier this year:
Comments Daniel Thanks the second and third articles were excellent. I just wanted to say (1) Thank You and (2) Any other material you can refer me to... I answer my own question instead of commenting yours! Sorry....didn't notice where I was.....but the info you provided does brings some "ideas"......still worried.....but getting better.... Just to be extra sure "Project" = "Workspace" on the context of these articles right?
Thanks again! Hi Mariana
A "project" in RRC (or RQM or RTC) refers to a grouping of artifacts within a common administrative domain. Yes, informally you could think of this as a workspace for RRC, but some of the other jazz tools have a different meaning for "workspace".
|
|
I am happy to see that there is no limit (at least theoretically) on the number of workspaces. That is good news!!! How ever, I am still very concern............Assuming projects are equivalent to workspaces, it is nice to see an example with almost 50 works spaces and see the response time on that "enviroment"......... The DATA VOLUMEN section of the Performance Comparison article (very nice article) have some interesting data....I am assuming the "repository" means the total data on the Composer Jazz Server? This is what I saw on that section.......: The repository contained 200,000 artifacts and consisted of the following:
While this is a step forward .......My concern is, we are talking about creating several (and I mean in the order of thousands to start probably close to 3 thousand) workspaces and the expectation is there will be "hundreds" of link across several of those works spaces......same goes for folders, reviews, number of artfacts, links etc...and, we plan to have the whole CLM solution implemented.....not just Composer, so there will be links to "items" in other tools! ....To be fair, this may be perfectly okay using the JAZZ platform, and maybe I am worried for no reason....what we are trying to do sounds big and complex to me....but maybe this is what CLM is about and I just need to understand it better! I see the recommended number of user is 400 for Composer 4.0.1.........That is also good news! Any other word of advice? or document I can find good information on? |
This does not directly address the scale question you mention above but there are plan items in the RM Backlog that will allow multiple RM servers, rather than the single RM server per JTS server that you have today. There are also other plan items investigating performance improvements.
This should not only improve performance but also improve the scale.
The idea is that each year to ensure continual performance improvement so that RRC is ahead of customer needs.
Comments Robin, Glad to talk to you again!!! Question, on the "Support multiple RM servers sharing a single JTS" I saw this comment form George DeCandido (comment #7) "This one is important as it will prevent scalability. Without doing this, you will only ever be able to have one RM server as part of any CLM installation".... With that in mind, .....If we had more than one CLM (CLM = Composer (RM) server, a RTC server and "Test" (server - could be QM or QC thru plug in) ......Is it possible to link items that exist in different CLM solutions? Thank You!!!! Linking is one of the strengths of the CLM solution. It provides traceability / visibility across the teams and makes it possible to ask important questions. I suggest you look at the "5 imperatives" posts on the jazz.net blog for more inspiration and examples of what is possible. |
|
Mariana, it sounds like your deployment is going to be large enough that it would be a good investment to get some expertise from IBM or one of our business partners to help you plan your deployment. The way you organize your system (how many physical servers, how many software servers, etc. makes a large difference in the scaleability of the system. Someone who has done this before can help you get it right the first time, share lessons based on what other large deployments have done, etc. If you need help figuring out who to ask for help, send me a note directly (dmoul at usdotibmdotcom)
|
Your answer
Dashboards and work items are no longer publicly available, so some links may be invalid. We now provide similar information through other means. Learn more here.