RTCEE Performance Testing: EE Workload Scenario Scenario 1 Test Report

Introduction

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

Topology

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

Dual Tier Topology: z/OS

Test Topology Parameterization

Results

• For 8 hours long run of scenario1, 46 times(iterations) concurrent builds have been launched, total 1288 personal builds and 44 team builds have been processed successfully.

• Personal build time/aversage build time of concurrent builds in 8 hours test;

• No build(both personal and team build) fails in EE workload scenario 1 test;
• CPU usage of CLM server is < 60% ;
  

• CPU usage of BST & DB2z is < 60% ;
  

• CPU usage of DB2z is smoothly under 6% ;
  

• 140.4 Contributors are simulated in 2nd run - Overall Count Attempted Tasks For Run = 23990
• Size of repository volume don't increases in 8 hours exeuction(compare end with start condition).
• Indice incremental rate:

  Indice Directory Name	Before execution	After execution	Incresed Rate
  _Indices	2115620	2242828	6.01%
  ./jfs-rdfhistory	308	424	37.66%
  ./jfs-rdfindex	1986436	2112940	6.37%
  ./jfs-texthistory	52	252	0.00%
  ./jfs-textindex	128816	129404	0.46%

  About the authors

  JorgeAlbertoDiaz

  ---

  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