| Author |
Message |
|
| Guest |
 Posted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 11:12 pm |
 |
|
|
Guest
|
So what is the deal with the "-shared" option? There doesn't seem to be
much documentation on it. We had it on when we were running erlang R11B
without really knowing whether it benefited us or not.
But now that we've downgraded erlang to R10B, ejabberd no longer starts
up when I add the -shared option. So we're running without the option
now. Any ideas?
Thanks,
--simon
_______________________________________________
ejabberd mailing list
ejabberd@jabber.ru
http://lists.jabber.ru/mailman/listinfo/ejabberd
Post recived from mailinglist |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 11:28 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
To allow the -shared option, you can edit erts/Makefile (under the OTP
source dir) and set:
BUILD_SHARED_EMU=true
There is another option -hybrid (which should be built by default except
for Windows, VxVorks, and OSE) that tries to get some of the same
benfits by having per-process heaps as well as a shared heap.
I've never done much experimenting though with either of these options,
except when I've tried -hybrid on a web server Erlang project, erlang
would sometimes crash when doing garbage collection. I had a C port
driver in this case, so I don't know if it was something that I did.
On Thu, 2006-09-14 at 16:11 -0700, Simon Yeo wrote:
> So what is the deal with the "-shared" option? There doesn't seem to be
> much documentation on it. We had it on when we were running erlang R11B
> without really knowing whether it benefited us or not.
>
> But now that we've downgraded erlang to R10B, ejabberd no longer starts
> up when I add the -shared option. So we're running without the option
> now. Any ideas?
>
> Thanks,
> --simon
> _______________________________________________
> ejabberd mailing list
> ejabberd@jabber.ru
> http://lists.jabber.ru/mailman/listinfo/ejabberd
--
Matthew Reilly
matthew.reilly@sipphone.com
Gizmo Project name: matt
_______________________________________________
ejabberd mailing list
ejabberd@jabber.ru
http://lists.jabber.ru/mailman/listinfo/ejabberd
Post recived from mailinglist |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:13 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
I guess my question is if you folks have seen any evidence that having
shared heap is helping any. Does it definitely improve ejabberd's
memory usage problem? Does it impact performance one way or another?
--simon
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ejabberd-bounces@jabber.ru
> [mailto:ejabberd-bounces@jabber.ru] On Behalf Of Matthew Reilly
> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 4:28 PM
> To: ejabberd@jabber.ru
> Subject: Re: [ejabberd] -shared
>
> To allow the -shared option, you can edit erts/Makefile
> (under the OTP source dir) and set:
>
> BUILD_SHARED_EMU=true
>
> There is another option -hybrid (which should be built by
> default except for Windows, VxVorks, and OSE) that tries to
> get some of the same benfits by having per-process heaps as
> well as a shared heap.
>
> I've never done much experimenting though with either of
> these options, except when I've tried -hybrid on a web server
> Erlang project, erlang would sometimes crash when doing
> garbage collection. I had a C port driver in this case, so I
> don't know if it was something that I did.
>
> On Thu, 2006-09-14 at 16:11 -0700, Simon Yeo wrote:
> > So what is the deal with the "-shared" option? There
> doesn't seem to
> > be much documentation on it. We had it on when we were
> running erlang
> > R11B without really knowing whether it benefited us or not.
> >
> > But now that we've downgraded erlang to R10B, ejabberd no longer
> > starts up when I add the -shared option. So we're running
> without the
> > option now. Any ideas?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --simon
> > _______________________________________________
> > ejabberd mailing list
> > ejabberd@jabber.ru
> > http://lists.jabber.ru/mailman/listinfo/ejabberd
> --
> Matthew Reilly
> matthew.reilly@sipphone.com
> Gizmo Project name: matt
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ejabberd mailing list
> ejabberd@jabber.ru
> http://lists.jabber.ru/mailman/listinfo/ejabberd
>
_______________________________________________
ejabberd mailing list
ejabberd@jabber.ru
http://lists.jabber.ru/mailman/listinfo/ejabberd
Post recived from mailinglist |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 7:06 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Maybe I'm out of the loop, what ejabberd memory usage problem?
-- Yermo
> I guess my question is if you folks have seen any evidence that having
> shared heap is helping any. Does it definitely improve ejabberd's
> memory usage problem? Does it impact performance one way or another?
>
> --simon
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ejabberd-bounces@jabber.ru
>> [mailto:ejabberd-bounces@jabber.ru] On Behalf Of Matthew Reilly
>> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 4:28 PM
>> To: ejabberd@jabber.ru
>> Subject: Re: [ejabberd] -shared
>>
>> To allow the -shared option, you can edit erts/Makefile
>> (under the OTP source dir) and set:
>>
>> BUILD_SHARED_EMU=true
>>
>> There is another option -hybrid (which should be built by
>> default except for Windows, VxVorks, and OSE) that tries to
>> get some of the same benfits by having per-process heaps as
>> well as a shared heap.
>>
>> I've never done much experimenting though with either of
>> these options, except when I've tried -hybrid on a web server
>> Erlang project, erlang would sometimes crash when doing
>> garbage collection. I had a C port driver in this case, so I
>> don't know if it was something that I did.
>>
>> On Thu, 2006-09-14 at 16:11 -0700, Simon Yeo wrote:
>> > So what is the deal with the "-shared" option? There
>> doesn't seem to
>> > be much documentation on it. We had it on when we were
>> running erlang
>> > R11B without really knowing whether it benefited us or not.
>> >
>> > But now that we've downgraded erlang to R10B, ejabberd no longer
>> > starts up when I add the -shared option. So we're running
>> without the
>> > option now. Any ideas?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > --simon
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > ejabberd mailing list
>> > ejabberd@jabber.ru
>> > http://lists.jabber.ru/mailman/listinfo/ejabberd
>> --
>> Matthew Reilly
>> matthew.reilly@sipphone.com
>> Gizmo Project name: matt
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ejabberd mailing list
>> ejabberd@jabber.ru
>> http://lists.jabber.ru/mailman/listinfo/ejabberd
>>
> _______________________________________________
> ejabberd mailing list
> ejabberd@jabber.ru
> http://lists.jabber.ru/mailman/listinfo/ejabberd
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
DTLink Software http://www.dtlink.com
Business and Finance Software Engineering
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
ejabberd mailing list
ejabberd@jabber.ru
http://lists.jabber.ru/mailman/listinfo/ejabberd
Post recived from mailinglist |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:10 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Hello,
I think you should absolutely avoid this option. On ejabberd use of the
shared heap makes memory consumption less predictable and it can jump
very very quickly when using this option.
* Simon Yeo <simon@meebo.com> [2006-09-14 16:11:43 -0700]:
> So what is the deal with the "-shared" option? There doesn't seem to be
> much documentation on it. We had it on when we were running erlang R11B
> without really knowing whether it benefited us or not.
>
> But now that we've downgraded erlang to R10B, ejabberd no longer starts
> up when I add the -shared option. So we're running without the option
> now. Any ideas?
>
> Thanks,
> --simon
> _______________________________________________
> ejabberd mailing list
> ejabberd@jabber.ru
> http://lists.jabber.ru/mailman/listinfo/ejabberd
>
--
Micka |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:52 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
* Simon Yeo <simon@meebo.com> [2006-09-14 23:13:01 -0700]:
> I guess my question is if you folks have seen any evidence that having
> shared heap is helping any. Does it definitely improve ejabberd's
> memory usage problem? Does it impact performance one way or another?
As I said, nor -shared nor -hybrid will help in this case. It will
make things worst.
>From what I know, I think your usage pattern is a bit special, as your
memory consumption is not at all usual for your level of usage.
How to solve it really, really depends on the detail of your
requirements, your constraints, pattern usage, etc.
We are working on several new approach that are being experimented in
the "lab" and that make ejabberd even more scalable.
Normally, with the current version, in a cluster, you should be able to
support at least 150k users.
We are working currently working to break this limit by a large margin
 Some of the improvement will probably be ready for the 1.2 version
(The next one will be 1.1.2).
For large sites, you must be aware that you cannot take ejabberd as a
product. At some point, all IM server should be used as tool.
Running a service with large amount of users is _HARD_. _Very hard_.
You cannot take a software out of the box deploy it and connects
millions of users. Never. This happens in big hardware vendors
commercials, but not in real life. You have to know the context of your
deploiement. You have to know your tool very well. You have to change
it, improve it, optimize it.
Cheers,
--
Micka |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:54 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Hello Yermo,
* Yermo Lamers <yml@dtlink.com> [2006-09-15 03:06:52 -0400]:
> Maybe I'm out of the loop, what ejabberd memory usage problem?
ejabberd is memory bound and not CPU bound for now. An ejabberd server
usually reach its limits on memory consumption.
Cheers,
--
Micka |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 3:25 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
> Hello Yermo,
>
> * Yermo Lamers <yml@dtlink.com> [2006-09-15 03:06:52 -0400]:
>
>> Maybe I'm out of the loop, what ejabberd memory usage problem?
>
> ejabberd is memory bound and not CPU bound for now. An ejabberd server
> usually reach its limits on memory consumption.
Is there some general guideline for how much memory one would need for how
many users?
For instance, is there a memory recommendation for an ejabberd server
serving 1000 users?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
DTLink Software http://www.dtlink.com
Business and Finance Software Engineering
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
ejabberd mailing list
ejabberd@jabber.ru
http://lists.jabber.ru/mailman/listinfo/ejabberd
Post recived from mailinglist |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
All times are GMT
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
|
Digg It
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Facebook
Stumble Upon
Technorati
