Rational Team Concert For IBMi Concurrent Build Performance

Introduction

Based on the test data, there is a little improvement of the concurrent build run duration, which is due to the constant performance improvements of the dependency build feature.

The performance data provided is obtained by benchmark test of each release. This report only includes the build run duration information.

Disclaimer

The information in this document is distributed AS IS. The use of this information or the implementation of any of these techniques is a customer responsibility and depends on the customer’s ability to evaluate and integrate them into the customer’s operational environment. While each item may have been reviewed by IBM for accuracy in a specific situation, there is no guarantee that the same or similar results will be obtained elsewhere. Customers attempting to adapt these techniques to their own environments do so at their own risk. Any pointers in this publication to external Web sites are provided for convenience only and do not in any manner serve as an endorsement of these Web sites. Any performance data contained in this document was determined in a controlled environment, and therefore, the results that may be obtained in other operating environments may vary significantly. Users of this document should verify the applicable data for their specific environment.

Performance is based on measurements and projections using standard IBM benchmarks in a controlled environment. The actual throughput or performance that any user will experience will vary depending upon many factors, including considerations such as the amount of multi-programming in the user’s job stream, the I/O configuration, the storage configuration, and the workload processed. Therefore, no assurance can be given that an individual user will achieve results similar to those stated here.

This testing was done as a way to compare and characterize the differences in performance between different versions of the product. The results shown here should thus be looked at as a comparison of the contrasting performance between different versions, and not as an absolute benchmark of performance.

What our tests measure

We use predominantly automated tooling such as Rational Performance Tester (RPT) to simulate a workload normally generated by client software such as the Eclipse client or web browsers. All response times listed are those measured by our automated tooling and not a client.

The diagram below describes at a very high level which aspects of the entire end-to-end experience (human end-user to server and back again) that our performance tests simulate. The tests described in this article simulate a segment of the end-to-end transaction as indicated in the middle of the diagram. Performance tests are server-side and capture response times for this segment of the transaction.

Findings

Based on the test data, concurrent build performance of the RTC for IBMi has improved from 5.0.2 to 6.0.1.

From 5.0.2 to 6.0, the overall improvement of the build time is about 5% for concurrent team build, but no obvious improvement in concurrent personal build.

From 6.0 to 6.0.1, the overall improvement of the build time is about 2% for concurrent team build.

Topology

The tests are executed in a Single Tier Topology infrastructure like the one in the following diagram:

Single Tier Topology: IBMi

The RTC server was set up based on WebSphere and DB2 on IBMi. The build machine with Rational Build Agent was on IBMi.

Methodology

The sample projects for the test are:

• Maillist Application *250

In the repository the source code is stored in one stream with one single component which includes 5 zComponent Projects.

Every test is executed twice against each version.

Test Scenario Description

Results

Note : since 6.0.1 benchmark , we have replaced our IBMi performance testing LPARs and new performance baselines are created. 6.0 benchmark have been re-run to compare on identical hardware.

Run duration

The charts below show the build run duration comparison between 5.0.2 and 6.0, and from v6.0 to v6.0.1. Tests are run twice against each release and the average time is taken for comparison.

From 5.0.2 to 6.0, the overall improvement of the build time is about 5% for concurrent team build, but no obvious improvement in concurrent personal build.

From 6.0 to 6.0.1, the overall improvement of the build time is about 2% for concurrent team build.

The data in the charts are the average time of the concurrent builds.

Concurrent team build

Concurrent personal build

Appendix A - Key Tuning Parameters

 -Xmn768m -Xgcpolicy:gencon -Xcompressedrefs -Xgc:preferredHeapBase=0x200000000
 -Xmx6g -Xms6g

About the authors

LuLu SuHui

Questions and comments:

• What other performance information would you like to see here?
• Do you have performance scenarios to share?
• Do you have scenarios that are not addressed in documentation?
• Where are you having problems in performance?

Warning: Can't find topic Deployment.PerformanceDatasheetReaderComments