<sticky><style type="text/css"> h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6 {font-family: arial,sans-serif; color:#595959; background:none; } h2 {border-bottom-color:#D2D2D2; } h3, h4, h5, h6 {border:none; } </style></sticky> %INCLUDE{%TWIKIWEB%.WebTopicCreator}% <div id="header-title" style="padding: 10px 15px; border-width:1px; border-style:solid; border-color:#FFD28C; background-image: url(<nop>https://jazz.net/wiki/pub/Deployment/WebPreferences/TLASE.jpg); background-size: cover; font-size:120%"> <!-- * Set ALLOWTOPICCHANGE = Main.TWikiDeploymentDatasheetsAuthorsGroup, Main.TWikiAdminGroup, Main.GrantCovell --> ---+!! <img src="https://jazz.net/wiki/pub/Deployment/WebPreferences/new.png" alt="new.png" width="50" height="50" align="right">Collaborative Lifecycle Management performance report: ETL 4.0.4 release</br> %DKGRAY% Authors: Main.PengPengWang</br> Last updated: Sep. 26, 2013</br> Build basis: CLM 4.0.4 %ENDCOLOR%</div></sticky> <!-- Page contents top of page on right hand side in box --> <sticky><div style="float:right; border-width:1px; border-style:solid; border-color:#DFDFDF; background-color:#F6F6F6; margin:0 0 15px 15px; padding: 0 15px 0 15px;"> %TOC{title="Page contents"}% </div></sticky> <sticky><div style="margin:15px;"></sticky> ---++ Introduction This report compares the performance of an unclustered Rational Requirements Composer version 4.0.4 deployment to the previous 4.0.3 release. The test objective is achieved in three steps: * Run version 4.0.3 with standard 1-hour test using 400 concurrent users. * Run version 4.0.4 with standard 1-hour test using 400 concurrent users. * The test is run three time for each version and the resulting six tests are compared with each other. Three tests per version is used to get a more accurate picture since there are variations expected between runs. ---+++!! 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 customers ability to evaluate and integrate them into the customers 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 users 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 plan loading between the two different versions of the Rational Team Concert product. The results shown here should thus be looked at as a comparison of the contrasting performance between the two versions, and not as an absolute benchmark of performance. ---++ Findings ---+++ Performance goals * Verify that there are no performance regressions between current release and prior release with 400 concurrent users using the workload described below. ---+++ Findings * RPT report shows similar response times for 4.0.4 and 4.0.3. * In 4.0.4 many actions are slightly faster than in 4.0.3. * Comparing nmon data for both 4.0.4 and 4.0.3 show similar CPU, memory and disk utilization on application servers and database server. ---++ Topology The topology under test is based on [[https://jazz.net/library/article/820#Enterprise_Distributed_Linux__DB2][Standard Topology (E1) Enterprise - Distributed / Linux / DB2.]] <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/ServerOverview.png" alt="Server Overview" width="70%" height="70%" /> The specifications of machines under test are listed in the table below. Server tuning details listed in [[#AppendixA][*Appendix A*]] <table class="gray-table"> <tbody> <tr> <th valign="top">Function</th> <th valign="top">Number of Machines</th> <th valign="top">Machine Type</th> <th valign="top">CPU / Machine</th> <th valign="top">Total # of CPU Cores/Machine</th> <th valign="top">Memory/Machine</th> <th valign="top">Disk</th> <th valign="top">Disk capacity</th> <th valign="top">Network interface</th> <th valign="top">OS and Version</th> </tr> <tr> <td>IBM HTTP Server and !WebSphere Plugin</td> <td>1</td> <td>IBM System x3250 M4</td> <td>1 x Intel Xeon E3-1240 3.4GHz (quad-core)</td> <td>8</td> <td>16GB</td> <td>RAID 1 -- SAS Disk x 2</td> <td>279GB</td> <td>Gigabit Ethernet</td> <td>Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.3 (Santiago)</td> </tr> <tr> <td>JTS Server</td> <td>1</td> <td>IBM System x3550 M4</td> <td>2 x Intel Xeon E5-2640 2.5GHz (six-core)</td> <td>24</td> <td>32GB</td> <td>RAID 5 -- SAS Disk x 4</td> <td>279GB</td> <td>Gigabit Ethernet</td> <td>Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.3 (Santiago)</td> </tr> <tr> <td>RRC Server</td> <td>1</td> <td>IBM System x3550 M4</td> <td>2 x Intel Xeon E5-2640 2.5GHz (six-core)</td> <td>24</td> <td>32GB</td> <td>RAID 5 -- SAS Disk x 4</td> <td>279GB</td> <td>Gigabit Ethernet</td> <td>Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.3 (Santiago)</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Database Server</td> <td>1</td> <td>IBM System x3650 M4</td> <td>2 x Intel Xeon E5-2640 2.5GHz (six-core)</td> <td>24</td> <td>64GB</td> <td>RAID 10 -- SAS Disk x 16</td> <td>279GB</td> <td>Gigabit Ethernet</td> <td>Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.3 (Santiago)</td> </tr> <tr> <td>RPT Workbench</td> <td>1</td> <td>VM image</td> <td>2 x Intel Xeon X7550 CPU (1-Core 2.0GHz 64-bit)</td> <td>2</td> <td>6GB</td> <td>SCSI</td> <td>80GB</td> <td>Gigabit Ethernet</td> <td>Microsoft Windows Server 2003 R2 Standard Edition SP2</td> </tr> <tr> <td>RPT Agent</td> <td>1</td> <td>xSeries 345</td> <td>4 x Intel Xeon X3480 CPU (1-Core 3.20GHz 32-bit)</td> <td>4</td> <td>3GB</td> <td>SCSI</td> <td>70GB</td> <td>Gigabit Ethernet</td> <td>Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition SP2</td> </tr> <tr> <td>RPT Agent</td> <td>1</td> <td>xSeries 345</td> <td>4 x Intel Xeon X3480 CPU (1-Core 3.20GHz 32-bit)</td> <td>4</td> <td>3GB</td> <td>RAID 1 - SCSI Disk x 2</td> <td>70GB</td> <td>Gigabit Ethernet</td> <td>Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition SP2</td> </tr> <tr> <td>RPT Agent</td> <td>1</td> <td>Lenovo 9196A49</td> <td>1 x Intel Xeon E6750 CPU (2-Core 2.66GHz 32-bit)</td> <td>2</td> <td>2GB</td> <td>SATA</td> <td>230GB</td> <td>Gigabit Ethernet</td> <td>Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition SP2</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Network switches</td> <td>N/A</td> <td>Cisco 2960G-24TC-L</td> <td>N/A</td> <td>N/A</td> <td>N/A</td> <td>N/A</td> <td>N/A</td> <td>Gigabit Ethernet</td> <td>24 Ethernet 10/100/1000 ports</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> N/A: Not applicable. ---+++Network connectivity All server machines and test clients are located on the same subnet. The LAN has 1000 Mbps of maximum bandwidth and less than 0.3ms latency in ping. ---+++Data volume and shape The artifacts were distributed between 40 small projects, 10 medium projects and one large project for a total of 200,589 artifacts. The repository contained the following data: * 141 modules * 14,500 module artifacts * 3,203 folders * 434 collections * 274 reviews * 40,798 comments * 520 public tags * 110 private tags * 15,350 terms * 22,778 links * 360 views * Database size = 20 GB * JTS index size = 9 GB The large project contained the following data: * 11 modules * 1,160 folders * 78,842 requirement artifacts * 106 collections * 64 reviews * 16,897 comments * 300 public tags * 50 private tags * 9,006 terms * 15,594 links * 200 views ---++Methodology Rational Performance Tester was used to simulate the workload created using the web client. Each user completed a random use case from a set of available use cases. A Rational Performance Tester script is created for each use case. The scripts are organized by pages and each page represents a user action. Based on real customer use, the test scenario provides a ratio of 70% reads and 30% writes. The users completed use cases at a rate of 30 pages per hour per user. Each performance test runs for 60 minutes after all of the users are activated in the system. ---+++Test cases and workload characterization #TestCases <table class="gray-table"> <tbody> <tr> <th align="center">Use case</th> <th align="center">Description</th> <th align="center">% of Total Workload</th> </tr> <tr> <td>Login</td> <td>Connect to the server using server credentials.</td> <td align="center">None</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[[#CreateCollection][Create a collection]]</td> <td>Create collections with 10 artifacts.</td> <td align="center">6</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[[#FilterQuery][Filter a query]]</td> <td>Run a query that has100 results and open 3 levels of nested folders.</td> <td align="center">8</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[[#OpenNested][Open nested folders]]</td> <td>Create review and complete review process.</td> <td align="center">4</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[[#ManageFolders][Manage folders]]</td> <td>Create a folder, move it to a new location, and then delete the folder.</td> <td align="center">1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[[#QueryBy][Query by ID]]</td> <td>Search for a specific ID in the repository.</td> <td align="center">8 </td> </tr> <tr> <td>[[#ViewCollections][View collections]]</td> <td>View collections that contain 100 artifacts from the collections folders.</td> <td align="center">13</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[[#CheckSuspect][Check suspect links]]</td> <td>Open an artifact that has suspect links.</td> <td align="center">6</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[[#AddComments][Add comments to an artifact]]</td> <td>Open a requirement that has 100 comments and creates a comment addressed to 8 people on the team.</td> <td align="center">8</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[[#OpenProject][Open the project dashboard]]</td> <td>Open the project and dashboard for the first time.</td> <td align="center">7</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[[#CreateMulti][Create a multi-value artifact]]</td> <td>Create a multi-value artifact and then add a multi-value attribute.</td> <td align="center">2</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[[#CreateArtifact][Create an artifact]]</td> <td>Create a requirement that contains a table, an image and rich text. Edit an artifact that has 100 enumerated attributes and modify an attribute.</td> <td align="center">2</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[[#ShowArtifacts][Show artifacts in a Tree view]]</td> <td> Open a folder that contains artifacts with links and show the data in a tree view.</td> <td align="center">8</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[[#OpenGraphical][Open graphical artifacts]]</td> <td>Open business process diagrams, use cases, parts, images, sketches and story boards.</td> <td align="center">5</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[[#CreateEdit][Create and edit a storyboard]]</td> <td>Create and edit a storyboard.</td> <td align="center">4</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[[#DisplayHover][Display the hover information for a collection]]</td> <td>Open a collection that contains 100 artifacts and hover over the Artifacts page.</td> <td align="center">4</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[[#QueryString][Query by String]]</td> <td>Search for a string that returns 30 matched items.</td> <td align="center">10</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[[#CreateReport][Create a PDF report]]</td> <td>Generate a 50-artifact PDF report. </td> <td align="center">2</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[[#CreateWord][Create a Microsoft Word report]]</td> <td>Generate a 100-artifact Microsoft Word report.</td> <td align="center">2</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> ---++++Response time comparison The median response time provided more even results than the average response time. The nature of the high variance between tests where some tasks at time takes a longer time to run, such as when the server is under heavy load, makes the average response time less predictive. Both the median and average values are included in the following tables and charts for comparison. In the repository that contained 200,000 artifacts with 400 concurrent users, no obvious regression was shown when comparing response times between runs. The numbers in the following charts include all of the pages for all of the scripts that ran. ---++Results <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image007.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image011.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> *Garbage collection* Verbose garbage collection is enable to create the GC logs. The GC logs shows very little variation between runs. There is also no discernible difference between versions . Below is one example of the output from the GC log for each application. *RM* <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/jts403run1png.png" width="70%" height="70%" /> *JTS* <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/RMrun1.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> #CreateCollection Create a collection <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image014.png" width="70%" height="70%" /> [[#TestCases][Back to Test Cases & workload characterization]] #FilterQuery Filter a query <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image015.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> [[#TestCases][Back to Test Cases & workload characterization]] #OpenNested Open nested folders <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image016.png" width="70%" height="70%" /> [[#TestCases][Back to Test Cases & workload characterization]] #ManageFolders Manage folders <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image017.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> [[#TestCases][Back to Test Cases & workload characterization]] #QueryBy Query by ID <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image018.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> [[#TestCases][Back to Test Cases & workload characterization]] #ViewCollections View collections <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image019.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> [[#TestCases][Back to Test Cases & workload characterization]] #CheckSuspect Check suspect links <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image020.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> [[#TestCases][Back to Test Cases & workload characterization]] #AddComments Add comments to an artifact <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image021.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> [[#TestCases][Back to Test Cases & workload characterization]] #OpenProject Open the project dashboard <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image022.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> [[#TestCases][Back to Test Cases & workload characterization]] #CreateMulti Create a multi-value artifact <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image023.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> [[#TestCases][Back to Test Cases & workload characterization]] #CreateArtifact Create an artifact <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image024.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> [[#TestCases][Back to Test Cases & workload characterization]] #ShowArtifacts Show artifacts in a Tree view <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image025.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> [[#TestCases][Back to Test Cases & workload characterization]] #OpenGraphical Open graphical artifacts <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image026.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> [[#TestCases][Back to Test Cases & workload characterization]] #CreateEdit Create and edit a storyboard <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image027.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> [[#TestCases][Back to Test Cases & workload characterization]] #DisplayHover Display the hover information for a collection <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image028.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> [[#TestCases][Back to Test Cases & workload characterization]] #QueryString Query by string <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image029.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> [[#TestCases][Back to Test Cases & workload characterization]] #CreateReport Create a PDF report <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image030.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> [[#TestCases][Back to Test Cases & workload characterization]] #CreateWord Create a Microsoft Word report <img src="%ATTACHURLPATH%/image031.png" width="70%" height="70%"/> [[#TestCases][Back to Test Cases & workload characterization]] ---++ Appendix A #AppendixA <table class="gray-table"> <tbody> <tr> <th align="left" width="200"><strong>Product</strong><br></th> <th align="left" width="100"><strong>Version</strong></th> <th align="left" width="600"><strong>Highlights for configurations under test</strong></th> </tr> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top;">IBM HTTP Server for !WebSphere Application Server</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">8.5.0.1</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">IBM HTTP Server functions as a reverse proxy server implemented via Web server plug-in for !WebSphere Application Server. Configuration details can be found from the [[http://pic.dhe.ibm.com/infocenter/clmhelp/v4r0/index.jsp?topic=%2Fcom.ibm.jazz.install.doc%2Ftopics%2Ft_config_reverse_proxy_ihs.html][CLM infocenter]]. *HTTP server (httpd.conf)*: * !MaxClients: increase value for high-volume loads [[http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/httpserv/ihsdiag/ihs_performance.html][(adjust value based on user load)]] * !ThreadsPerChild = 50 *Web server plugin-in (plugin-cfg.xml)*: * !ServerIOTimeout="900" *OS Configuration*: * max user processes = unlimited </td> </tr> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top;">IBM !WebSphere Application Server Network Deployment</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">8.5.0.1</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;"><strong>JVM settings:</strong> * GC policy and arguments, max and init heap sizes: <verbatim> -XX:MaxDirectMemorySize=1g -Xgcpolicy:gencon -Xmx4g -Xms4g -Xmn512m -Xcompressedrefs -Xgc:preferredHeapBase=0x100000000 </verbatim> *Thread pools:* * Maximum !WebContainer = Minimum !WebContainer = 500 *OS Configuration:* System wide resources for the app server process owner: * max user processes = unlimited * open files = 65536 </td> </tr> <tr> <td>DB2</td> <td>DB2 10.1</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>LDAP server</td> <td> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>License server</td> <td> </td> <td>Hosted locally by JTS server</td> </tr> <tr> <td>RPT workbench</td> <td>8.2.1.5</td> <td>Defaults</td> </tr> <tr> <td>RPT agents</td> <td>8.2.1.5</td> <td>Defaults</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Network</td> <td> </td> <td>Shared subnet within test lab</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> ---++++!! For more information * Jazz.net library article: [[https://jazz.net/library/article/814/][Collaborative Lifecycle Management 2012 Sizing Report (Standard Topology E1)]] ---++++!! About the authors Main.PengPengWang <sticky></div></sticky>
This topic: Deployment
>
WebTopicCreator
History: r4 - 2013-09-26 - 18:12:26 - Main.raube
Copyright © by IBM and non-IBM contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Contributions are governed by our
Terms of Use.
Please read the following
disclaimer
.