| Author |
Message
|
| chenna.hari |
 Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2012 6:41 am Post subject: WBI JDBC adapters memory utilisation |
 |
|
Centurion
Joined: 21 Mar 2009
Posts: 103
|
Hi,
we have 10 connectors configured in Websphere Business Integration JDBC Adapters.
currently JVM_ARGS="-Xms512m -Xmx1024m" is given in adapterEnv.sh script. Now the memory utilisation in the adapter server is almost reached to99%
for one of the connector, we need to increase the JVM values from 1 GB to 1.5GB. we found recently that JVM values can be updated in start scripts for that connector instead of modifying at adapterEnv.sh script.
the question is how to find the memory utilisation by each connector. the plan is to reduce the memory for other connectors and increase the memory for the connector required instead of adding the physical memory
Please help. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| lancelotlinc |
| Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2012 7:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 22 Mar 2010
Posts: 4941
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
One possible solution to this problem is to consolidate your database connections through a mechanism like solidDb. You'll find your performance and hence your memory utilization will become more fluid.
_________________
http://leanpub.com/IIB_Tips_and_Tricks
Save $20: Coupon Code: MQSERIES_READER |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2012 7:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
| lancelotlinc wrote: |
| One possible solution to this problem is to consolidate your database connections through a mechanism like solidDb. You'll find your performance and hence your memory utilization will become more fluid. |
You should be aware that such a solution will cost money for the purchase of SolidDb plus the learning plus the system setup so it might end up not being as attractive as my colleague tries to make out.
_________________
WMQ User since 1999
MQSI/WBI/WMB/'Thingy' User since 2002
Linux user since 1995
Every time you reinvent the wheel the more square it gets (anon). If in doubt think and investigate before you ask silly questions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| lancelotlinc |
| Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2012 7:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 22 Mar 2010
Posts: 4941
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
| smdavies99 wrote: |
| lancelotlinc wrote: |
| One possible solution to this problem is to consolidate your database connections through a mechanism like solidDb. You'll find your performance and hence your memory utilization will become more fluid. |
You should be aware that such a solution will cost money for the purchase of SolidDb plus the learning plus the system setup so it might end up not being as attractive as my colleague tries to make out. |
What solution do you recommend? : r f e : We already know that the WMB product does not efficiently use database connections and that the product architect is aware of the customer request to be more efficient in usage of same.
_________________
http://leanpub.com/IIB_Tips_and_Tricks
Save $20: Coupon Code: MQSERIES_READER |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2012 7:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
the first thing I'd recommend is getting rid of obsolete and out of support WBI Adapaters, and moving to something more current.
I'd strongly consider altering the process flow as well, to stop using a database as a means of communication between two applications. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2012 8:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
| lancelotlinc wrote: |
| We already know that the WMB product does not efficiently use database connections and that the product architect is aware of the customer request to be more efficient in usage of same. |
This might be true in your situation BUT this 'feature/problem' does not affect the operation every installation of Broker. Not everyone is working on systems that demand the sorts of performance like yours.
I am sure that there are many sites who would not even consider spending more money on something like SolidDb no matter how good it might be.
_________________
WMQ User since 1999
MQSI/WBI/WMB/'Thingy' User since 2002
Linux user since 1995
Every time you reinvent the wheel the more square it gets (anon). If in doubt think and investigate before you ask silly questions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2012 8:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| smdavies99 wrote: |
| I am sure that there are many sites who would not even consider spending more money on something like SolidDb no matter how good it might be. |
Some sites wouldn't spend more money on a fire extinguisher even if they could smell smoke.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| lancelotlinc |
| Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2012 8:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 22 Mar 2010
Posts: 4941
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
| smdavies99 wrote: |
| lancelotlinc wrote: |
| We already know that the WMB product does not efficiently use database connections and that the product architect is aware of the customer request to be more efficient in usage of same. |
This might be true in your situation BUT this 'feature/problem' does not affect the operation every installation of Broker. Not everyone is working on systems that demand the sorts of performance like yours.
I am sure that there are many sites who would not even consider spending more money on something like SolidDb no matter how good it might be. |
Your point is valid. What is your suggested solution for the problem the OP points out: inefficient use of database connections?
_________________
http://leanpub.com/IIB_Tips_and_Tricks
Save $20: Coupon Code: MQSERIES_READER |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| lancelotlinc wrote: |
| What is your suggested solution for the problem the OP points out: inefficient use of database connections? |
That's not the problem that the OP points out.
The OP is complaining about memory usage, for what is almost certainly an unsupported version of the WBI Adapters that have been replaced and rewritten for reuse in both WAS/WPS and Broker.
And, again, you shouldn't use a database as a means for two applications to communicate with each other. You should use messages. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| marko.pitkanen |
| Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Chevalier
Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 440
Location: Jamsa, Finland
|
Hi,
EOS day for version 2.6.x WBIA adapter for JDBC seems to be 30.4.2014 if I got it right from sw filecycle table.
I think OP should do some researching how to measure java application memory usage on the OS they are running their adapters.
Perhaps they also should start to plan how they will move to other connectors / methods as mqjeff proposes.
--
Marko |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rekarm01 |
| Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2012 11:39 pm Post subject: Re: WBI JDBC adapters memory utilisation |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 1415
|
| lancelotlinc wrote: |
| One possible solution to this problem is ... |
Please read the thread before posting. Solving the wrong problem doesn't help anyone.
| lancelotlinc wrote: |
| We already know that the WMB product does not efficiently use database connections ... |
Not that it's relevant to this thread, but that still remains to be seen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| lancelotlinc |
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2012 5:17 am Post subject: Re: WBI JDBC adapters memory utilisation |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 22 Mar 2010
Posts: 4941
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
| rekarm01 wrote: |
| lancelotlinc wrote: |
| One possible solution to this problem is ... |
Please read the thread before posting. Solving the wrong problem doesn't help anyone. |
The global root problem presented by the OP is memory utilization by JDBC adapters which is interfering with operation of the OP's system.
| Quote: |
we have 10 connectors configured in Websphere Business Integration JDBC Adapters.
currently JVM_ARGS="-Xms512m -Xmx1024m" is given in adapterEnv.sh script. Now the memory utilisation in the adapter server is almost reached to99% |
My solution suggested was to streamline the use of the database connections by inserting a database connection consolidation mechanism of an in-memory database which is backed by the data source the OP wants to use. The result of this streamline approach would be to more efficiently use the available resources and perhaps not need to have so much memory devoted to the JDBC adapters. It is not a guaranteed approach, but could solve the root global problem.
| rekarm01 wrote: |
| lancelotlinc wrote: |
| We already know that the WMB product does not efficiently use database connections ... |
Not that it's relevant to this thread, but that still remains to be seen. |
I can see our : r f e : has an uphill battle to achieve advancement on the architect's vision for product improvement.
| rekarm01 wrote: |
| Please read the thread before posting. |
I do read the posts, although I admit I could use some new glasses.
| rekarm01 wrote: |
| Solving the wrong problem doesn't help anyone. |
And what do you suggest to solve the OP's problem?
_________________
http://leanpub.com/IIB_Tips_and_Tricks
Save $20: Coupon Code: MQSERIES_READER |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| nathanw |
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2012 5:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 550
|
how about we actually answer the question asked
| Code: |
| the question is how to find the memory utilisation by each connector. the plan is to reduce the memory for other connectors and increase the memory for the connector required instead of adding the physical memory |
instead of re-inventing the wheel
_________________
Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard drive?
Artificial Intelligence stands no chance against Natural Stupidity.
Only the User Trace Speaks The Truth  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| lancelotlinc |
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2012 5:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 22 Mar 2010
Posts: 4941
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
| nathanw wrote: |
how about we actually answer the question asked
| Code: |
| the question is how to find the memory utilisation by each connector. the plan is to reduce the memory for other connectors and increase the memory for the connector required instead of adding the physical memory |
instead of re-inventing the wheel |
And your answer to this question is ?
_________________
http://leanpub.com/IIB_Tips_and_Tricks
Save $20: Coupon Code: MQSERIES_READER |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| nathanw |
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2012 5:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 550
|
I do not know the answer BUT
a) would be interested in the answer
b) would like to see an actually answer instead other suggested solutions or arguments about suggested solutions
_________________
Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard drive?
Artificial Intelligence stands no chance against Natural Stupidity.
Only the User Trace Speaks The Truth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
