Your achievements

Level 1

0% to

Level 2

Tip /
Sign in

Sign in to Community

to gain points, level up, and earn exciting badges like the new
Bedrock Mission!

Learn more

View all

Sign in to view all badges

SOLVED

CQ Performance difference

Avatar

Level 4

Hi,

We feel that the CQ's performance on a server and on a desktop is very different.  Both machines have the same Java version, yet with the same content, loading time on the desktop is very much faster than the server.  The server's memory and CPU power are more superior than the desktop's, so it is very frustrating to find that the server is performing more slowly than a desktop.

A page that takes 70ms to load on a desktop (per the request log), takes 7000ms to load on the server.  What should we check and do to find out why the server is behaving this way?

Thank You.

1 Accepted Solution

Avatar

Correct answer by
Employee Advisor

First check that the hardware is indeed superior. (I had that experience too and it turned out the the super-duper-server had 32 cores, but only with 1Ghz each (Sun T1), while the desktop was a core2duo with 2.5 ghz).

Then check the system monitoring of the server. Is the system CPU or I/O-bound? Then analyze the request using http://host:4502/system/console/requests where you can see how long each component took, using that you should be able to identify the hot spots.

View solution in original post

0 Replies

Avatar

Correct answer by
Employee Advisor

First check that the hardware is indeed superior. (I had that experience too and it turned out the the super-duper-server had 32 cores, but only with 1Ghz each (Sun T1), while the desktop was a core2duo with 2.5 ghz).

Then check the system monitoring of the server. Is the system CPU or I/O-bound? Then analyze the request using http://host:4502/system/console/requests where you can see how long each component took, using that you should be able to identify the hot spots.

Avatar

Level 4

Hi,

The issue was with the replication setup in our instances.  Replication was incorrectly set, causing loops, which dragged down performance.  After correcting this, performance is back to normal (comparable to a local machine hosted CQ)

Thank You.