Browsing the tag jruby
STOMP Client on JRuby
Leave a comment | Filed under main
(2 votes, average: 4.50 out of 5)
Loading ...I recently needed to make use of our ActiveMQ message queue service to scale up write performance of CouchDB. However, there seemed to be a bug with JRuby that kills off the STOMP subscriber every 5 seconds. Digging a bit deeper into the STOMP source, I figured out a way to get around the bug by removing the timeout line.
ActiveMQ let me scale CouchDB writes from 10req/sec to 128req/sec. Huge performance win with very little effort.
STOMP Library Monkey Patch:
if defined?(JRUBY_VERSION)
module Stomp
class Connection
def _receive( read_socket )
@read_semaphore.synchronize do
line = read_socket.gets
return nil if line.nil?
# If the reading hangs for more than 5 seconds, abort the parsing process
#Timeout::timeout(5, Stomp::Error::PacketParsingTimeout) do
# Reads the beginning of the message until it runs into a empty line
message_header = ”
begin
message_header += line
begin
line = read_socket.gets
rescue
p read_socket
end
end until line =~ /^\s?\n$/
# Checks if it includes content_length header
content_length = message_header.match /content-length\s?:\s?(\d+)\s?\n/
message_body = ”
# If it does, reads the specified amount of bytes
char = ”
if content_length
message_body = read_socket.read content_length[1].to_i
raise Stomp::Error::InvalidMessageLength unless parse_char(read_socket.getc) == "\0"
# Else reads, the rest of the message until the first \0
else
message_body += char while read_socket.ready? && (char = parse_char(read_socket.getc)) != "\0"
end
# If the buffer isn’t empty, reads the next char and returns it to the buffer
# unless it’s a \n
if read_socket.ready?
last_char = read_socket.getc
read_socket.ungetc(last_char) if parse_char(last_char) != "\n"
end
# Adds the excluded \n and \0 and tries to create a new message with it
Message.new(message_header + "\n" + message_body + "\0")
end
#end
end
end
end
end
Ruby ThreadSafe JSMin Library
1 Comment | Filed under main (1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5) Loading ...I needed a thread-safe JSMin library for compressing javascripts on the fly on UploadBooth, so I took an existing ruby implementation and made it thread safe. I don’t think there was license defined when I got it, so I am re-releasing it as-is.
class JSMin
EOF = -1
include MonitorMixin
# jsmin — Copy the input to the output, deleting the characters which are
# insignificant to JavaScript. Comments will be removed. Tabs will be
# replaced with spaces. Carriage returns will be replaced with linefeeds.
# Most spaces and linefeeds will be removed.
# thread safe
def minimize(jstext)
synchronize do
@theA = ""
@theB = ""
@current = 0
@output = ""
@text = jstext
@theA = "\n"
action(3)
while (@theA != JSMin::EOF)
case @theA
when " "
if (isAlphanum(@theB))
action(1)
else
action(2)
end
when "\n"
case (@theB)
when "{","[","(","+","-"
action(1)
when " "
action(3)
else
if (isAlphanum(@theB))
action(1)
else
action(2)
end
end
else
case (@theB)
when " "
if (isAlphanum(@theA))
action(1)
else
action(3)
end
when "\n"
case (@theA)
when "}","]",")","+","-","\"","\\", "’", ‘"’
action(1)
else
if (isAlphanum(@theA))
action(1)
else
action(3)
end
end
else
action(1)
end
end
end
@output
end
end
private
# isAlphanum — return true if the character is a letter, digit, underscore,
# dollar sign, or non-ASCII character
def isAlphanum(c)
return false if !c || c == JSMin::EOF
return ((c >= ‘a’ && c <= ‘z’) || (c >= ’0′ && c <= ’9′) ||
(c >= ‘A’ && c <= ‘Z’) || c == ‘_’ || c == ‘$’ ||
c == ‘\’ || c[0] > 126)
end
# get — return the next character from stdin. Watch out for lookahead. If
# the character is a control character, translate it to a space or linefeed.
# thread safe
def get
return JSMin::EOF if @current>(@text.length-1)
c = @text[@current]
@current += 1
c = c.chr
return c if (c >= " " || c == "\n" || c.unpack("c") == JSMin::EOF)
return "\n" if (c == "\r")
return " "
end
# Get the next character without getting it.
def peek
lookaheadChar = @text[@current]
return lookaheadChar.chr
end
# mynext — get the next character, excluding comments.
# peek() is used to see if a ‘/‘ is followed by a ‘/‘ or ‘*‘.
def mynext
c = get
if (c == "/")
if(peek == "/")
while(true)
c = get
if (c <= "\n")
return c
end
end
end
if(peek == "*")
get
while(true)
case get
when "*"
if (peek == "/")
get
return " "
end
when JSMin::EOF
raise "Unterminated comment"
end
end
end
end
return c
end
# action — do something! What you do is determined by the argument: 1
# Output A. Copy B to A. Get the next B. 2 Copy B to A. Get the next B.
# (Delete A). 3 Get the next B. (Delete B). action treats a string as a
# single character. Wow! action recognizes a regular expression if it is
# preceded by ( or , or =.
def action(a)
if(a==1)
@output << @theA
end
if(a==1 || a==2)
@theA = @theB
if (@theA == "\’" || @theA == "\"")
while (true)
@output << @theA
@theA = get
break if (@theA == @theB)
raise "Unterminated string literal" if (@theA <= "\n")
if (@theA == "\\")
@output << @theA
@theA = get
end
end
end
end
if(a==1 || a==2 || a==3)
@theB = mynext
if (@theB == "/" && (@theA == "(" || @theA == "," || @theA == "=" ||
@theA == ":" || @theA == "[" || @theA == "!" ||
@theA == "&" || @theA == "|" || @theA == "?" ||
@theA == "{" || @theA == "}" || @theA == ";" ||
@theA == "\n"))
@output << @theA
@output << @theB
while (true)
@theA = get
if (@theA == "/")
break
elsif (@theA == "\\")
@output << @theA
@theA = get
elsif (@theA <= "\n")
raise "Unterminated RegExp Literal" + @output
end
@output << @theA
end
@theB = mynext
end
end
end
end
MogileFS Client on JRuby!
Leave a comment | Filed under programming (1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5) Loading ...Are you running JRuby in production? Do you want distributed file storage for your “enterprise” application? Look no further, MogileFS is here.
MogileFS-Client has compatibility issues with JRuby due to it’s use of the low level Socket class. JRuby 1.5-dev does not yet support all the Socket methods, so here is a monkey patch to get the ruby mogilefs client working on JRuby. Yes it blocks, but who cares JRuby has native threads.
This is exactly why I love Ruby; monkey patching.
def self.mogilefs_new(host,port,timeout=5.0)
TCPSocket.open(host,port,timeout)
end
end
class TCPSocket
attr_accessor :mogilefs_addr, :mogilefs_connected, :mogilefs_size, :mogilefs_tcp_cork
def self.open(host,port,timeout = 5.0)
super(host,port.to_i)
end
def readable?
true
end
def write_nonblock(data)
write(data)
end
def recv_nonblock(size,arg)
recv(size,arg)
end
def mogilefs_init(host = nil, port = nil)
true
end
end
Here is an example test case on how to get it all to work.
require ‘mogilefs’
# jmogilefs.rb is the monkey patch above
# load it after loading mogilefs client.
require ‘jmogilefs.rb’
mg = MogileFS::MogileFS.new(:domain=>‘testserv’,:hosts=>[‘xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:6001′])
p mg.get_file_data ‘video:100:default.jpg’
p mg.get_paths ‘video:100:default.jpg’,true
mg.list_keys(‘video:100′)[0].each do |f|
p f
end
Nginx Passenger vs JRuby on Jetty
3 Comments | Filed under administration benchmark
(2 votes, average: 4.00 out of 5) Loading ...I am in the process of evaluating which option to choose for a new production deployment of a Sinatra application.
Pros and Cons of the implementations:
JRuby Stack:
Pros:
• Multi-threaded, easy to scale with spiked traffic / shared resources.
Cons:
• Single process is a single point of failure.
MRI Ruby Stack:
Pros:
• Scaled via processes, no single point of failure.
Cons:
• Single Process, no shared resources (Possibly using more memory over time).
These tests are run against a real-world application that is soon to be released, not some dummy “hello world” application.
Application Background:
Sinatra / HAML templates (not compiled, rendered per request) / CouchDB / R18N Translation
Server Specifications:
Hardware: 8Gig / Quad Core Xeon x5355
MRI Stack:
Ruby 1.8.7 (2008-08-11 patchlevel 72)
Nginx Passenger 2.2.4
Passenger Config: passenger_max_pool_size 8, passenger_use_global_queue on
Java Stack:
JRuby 1.3.1 (ruby 1.8.6p287) (2009-06-15 6586)
Jetty-6.1.15
JDK Flags: -server -Xverify:none -XX:MaxPermSize=96m -XX:+AggressiveOpts -Xss128k -Xms256m -Xmx384m -XX:+UseParallelGC -XX:+UseParallelOldGC
JDK 1.7.0 b67
Here are the results. I have taken the best time out of 10 runs, giving enough time for the JDK to warmup and passenger to load all the children. The results are clipped for brevity.
Benchmark command:
JRuby Results:
Time per request: 116.316 [ms] (mean)
Time taken for tests: 11.632 seconds
Memory Use After Test: 437M (RSS)
MRI Results:
Time per request: 84.142 [ms] (mean)
Time taken for tests: 8.414 seconds
Memory Use After Test: 264M (RSS)
Conclusions and final thoughts:
Seems like MRI Ruby has a 39% performance advantage on JRuby executing my application. I am still a bit skeptical if MRI Ruby would still win out in production when it turns into a long running process marathon with varied traffic patterns. At the end of the day the JVM currently has the edge in garbage collection on MRI Ruby, so in “theory” JRuby should be the better choice. This is all a hypothetical guesstimate[sic] on my behalf. I will most likely end up trying both variants in production and see which works best.
Catalyst vs Rails Round Two
11 Comments | Filed under administration benchmark (6 votes, average: 3.17 out of 5) Loading ...There seems to be some interest Catalyst vs Rails vs Django benchmark. The older benchmark is quite old, it was done in 2007. A lot has changed since then. I am re-running the numbers once again to see what has changed. This time around the hardware is faster and the benchmark is slightly more simple. I am just stress testing the controller response performance of the two frameworks.
Benchmark System:
Quad Core Xeon x5355 @ 2.66GHz,8 Gigs Ram,OpenSolaris SNV98
Quick Summary:
Catalyst 5.8/Perl 5.10: 611.78req/sec (Single Process,bsdmalloc)
Catalyst 5.8/Perl 5.10: 1485.53req/sec (Multi Process,bsdmalloc)
Rails 2.3.2/MRI Ruby 1.8.7: 259.93req/sec (Single Process,bsdmalloc)
Rails 2.3.2/JRuby 1.3-dev: 311.71req/sec (Single-Threaded,bsdmalloc)
Rails 2.3.2/JRuby 1.3-dev: 992.32req/sec (Multi-Threaded,libumem)
Rails 2.3.2/MRI Ruby 1.9.1: 603.92req/sec (Single Process,bsdmalloc)
Catalyst 5.8 / Perl 5.10
Compiled: SUNCC -xO5 -xipo -fast -xtarget=native
# ab -n1000 -c100 http://somedomain:3000/ This is ApacheBench, Version 2.0.40-dev <$Revision: 1.146 $> apache-2.0 Copyright 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, http://www.zeustech.net/ Copyright 2006 The Apache Software Foundation, http://www.apache.org/ Benchmarking localhost (be patient) Completed 100 requests Completed 200 requests Completed 300 requests Completed 400 requests Completed 500 requests Completed 600 requests Completed 700 requests Completed 800 requests Completed 900 requests Finished 1000 requests Server Software: Server Hostname: somedomain Server Port: 3000 Document Path: / Document Length: 11 bytes Concurrency Level: 100 Time taken for tests: 0.673159 seconds Complete requests: 1000 Failed requests: 0 Write errors: 0 Total transferred: 159000 bytes HTML transferred: 11000 bytes Requests per second: 1485.53 [#/sec] (mean) Time per request: 67.316 [ms] (mean) Time per request: 0.673 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) Transfer rate: 230.26 [Kbytes/sec] received Connection Times (ms) min mean[+/-sd] median max Connect: 0 0 2.3 0 35 Processing: 15 62 10.8 62 103 Waiting: 15 59 11.6 61 98 Total: 15 62 10.6 63 103 Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms) 50% 63 66% 66 75% 69 80% 71 90% 74 95% 76 98% 86 99% 91 100% 103 (longest request)
Rails 2.3.2 / Ruby 1.8.7
Compiled: SUNCC -xO5 -xipo -fast -xtarget=native
# ab -n1000 -c100 http://somedomain:3000/main/index This is ApacheBench, Version 2.3 <$Revision: 655654 $> Copyright 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, http://www.zeustech.net/ Licensed to The Apache Software Foundation, http://www.apache.org/ Benchmarking somedomain (be patient) Completed 100 requests Completed 200 requests Completed 300 requests Completed 400 requests Completed 500 requests Completed 600 requests Completed 700 requests Completed 800 requests Completed 900 requests Completed 1000 requests Finished 1000 requests Server Software: Mongrel Server Hostname: somedomain Server Port: 3000 Document Path: /main/index Document Length: 11 bytes Concurrency Level: 100 Time taken for tests: 3.847 seconds Complete requests: 1000 Failed requests: 0 Write errors: 0 Total transferred: 290003 bytes HTML transferred: 11000 bytes Requests per second: 259.93 [#/sec] (mean) Time per request: 384.718 [ms] (mean) Time per request: 3.847 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) Transfer rate: 73.61 [Kbytes/sec] received Connection Times (ms) min mean[+/-sd] median max Connect: 0 0 1.1 0 16 Processing: 10 369 65.2 389 428 Waiting: 9 368 65.3 388 427 Total: 10 369 65.2 390 428 Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms) 50% 390 66% 396 75% 398 80% 400 90% 404 95% 407 98% 413 99% 417 100% 428 (longest request)
Rails 2.3.2 / JRuby 1.3-dev build 6586 (Multi-Threaded), libumem
Platform: JDK7 B56
# ab -n1000 -c100 http://somedomain.com:3000/main/index
This is ApacheBench, Version 2.3 <$Revision: 655654 $>
Copyright 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, http://www.zeustech.net/
Licensed to The Apache Software Foundation, http://www.apache.org/
Benchmarking somedomain.com (be patient)
Completed 100 requests
Completed 200 requests
Completed 300 requests
Completed 400 requests
Completed 500 requests
Completed 600 requests
Completed 700 requests
Completed 800 requests
Completed 900 requests
Completed 1000 requests
Finished 1000 requests
Server Software:
Server Hostname: somedomain.com
Server Port: 3000
Document Path: /main/index
Document Length: 11 bytes
Concurrency Level: 100
Time taken for tests: 1.008 seconds
Complete requests: 1000
Failed requests: 1
(Connect: 0, Receive: 0, Length: 1, Exceptions: 0)
Write errors: 0
Non-2xx responses: 1
Total transferred: 253875 bytes
HTML transferred: 11936 bytes
Requests per second: 992.32 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request: 100.773 [ms] (mean)
Time per request: 1.008 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate: 246.02 [Kbytes/sec] received
Connection Times (ms)
min mean[+/-sd] median max
Connect: 0 1 1.7 0 13
Processing: 10 79 18.8 80 122
Waiting: 9 79 18.8 79 122
Total: 10 80 18.9 80 122
Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
50% 80
66% 88
75% 94
80% 98
90% 102
95% 108
98% 113
99% 114
100% 122 (longest request)Rails 2.3.2 / JRuby 1.3-dev build 6586 (Single-Threaded)
Platform: JDK7 B56
# ab -n1000 -c100 http://somedomain:3000/main/index This is ApacheBench, Version 2.3 <$Revision: 655654 $> Copyright 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, http://www.zeustech.net/ Licensed to The Apache Software Foundation, http://www.apache.org/ Benchmarking somedomain (be patient) Completed 100 requests Completed 200 requests Completed 300 requests Completed 400 requests Completed 500 requests Completed 600 requests Completed 700 requests Completed 800 requests Completed 900 requests Completed 1000 requests Finished 1000 requests Server Software: Server Hostname: somedomain Server Port: 3000 Document Path: /main/index Document Length: 11 bytes Concurrency Level: 100 Time taken for tests: 3.208 seconds Complete requests: 1000 Failed requests: 0 Write errors: 0 Total transferred: 253000 bytes HTML transferred: 11000 bytes Requests per second: 311.71 [#/sec] (mean) Time per request: 320.810 [ms] (mean) Time per request: 3.208 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) Transfer rate: 77.01 [Kbytes/sec] received Connection Times (ms) min mean[+/-sd] median max Connect: 0 1 2.5 0 31 Processing: 37 304 56.4 318 350 Waiting: 36 304 56.5 318 349 Total: 37 305 56.5 318 352 Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms) 50% 318 66% 326 75% 330 80% 332 90% 336 95% 341 98% 345 99% 348 100% 352 (longest request)
Rails 2.3.2 / Ruby 1.9.1
Compiled: GCC -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer (SunCC failed to compile)
# ab -n1000 -c100 http://somedomain:3000/main/index This is ApacheBench, Version 2.3 <$Revision: 655654 $> Copyright 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, http://www.zeustech.net/ Licensed to The Apache Software Foundation, http://www.apache.org/ Benchmarking somedomain (be patient) Completed 100 requests Completed 200 requests Completed 300 requests Completed 400 requests Completed 500 requests Completed 600 requests Completed 700 requests Completed 800 requests Completed 900 requests Completed 1000 requests Finished 1000 requests Server Software: thin Server Hostname: somedomain Server Port: 3000 Document Path: /main/index Document Length: 11 bytes Concurrency Level: 100 Time taken for tests: 1.656 seconds Complete requests: 1000 Failed requests: 0 Write errors: 0 Total transferred: 267001 bytes HTML transferred: 11000 bytes Requests per second: 603.92 [#/sec] (mean) Time per request: 165.585 [ms] (mean) Time per request: 1.656 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) Transfer rate: 157.47 [Kbytes/sec] received Connection Times (ms) min mean[+/-sd] median max Connect: 0 0 0.6 0 8 Processing: 28 160 39.0 187 222 Waiting: 13 145 38.5 143 209 Total: 28 160 39.0 187 222 Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms) 50% 187 66% 190 75% 191 80% 191 90% 196 95% 201 98% 221 99% 221 100% 222 (longest request)
Conclusion
Seems like Catalyst has the edge in controller performance compared to Rails on MRI Ruby 1.8.7. Catalyst’s controller processing is 135% faster than Rails in single process performance and 471% faster as a forking multi process. It is nice to see that the Catalyst team addressed the controller performance short comings of the earlier versions of Catalyst. Like any benchmark take it with a grain of salt. In a real application your data access layer will most likely be the bottle neck.
Rails 2.3.2 under JRuby with threading enabled ran 283% faster than with MRI Ruby 1.8.7. I am anxiously waiting on JDK7 B57 with invoke dynamic support, this should help push JRuby’s performance even further. I guess I know what deployment option I will choose when deploying Rails.
Pick your poison, both frameworks provide excellent controller response performance. Keep in mind scaling is all about architecture and not how fast your controller’s responses are. That said, having an efficient framework does help 
