FMS 3.5 cpu usage
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
due to customer requirement for his app we have to use the old 3.5 version, the server is an Intel L5420 (8 cores), 16 giga RAM with centos 6.8 -64 bit. it goes up to 700 -800 video chat users, when it goes over that the app restarts although not the FMS. Monitoring while at 500 users, the cpu usage was 65%.
The same app works fine on a X5660 Intel processor,with more or less the same system and RAM.
Is there anything we can do on settings side so to use the 5420 which is much cheaper then the 5660?
thanks
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
800 users on 16 GB is less than 20 MB per user. my bet is RAM not CPU. have you tried to monitor swapping?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hi vayvanne,
I don't think so, both servers have 16 giga of RAM, and monitoring on the fms admin or through server root the RAM usage is little, surprisingly. What we notice is the CPU usage which on the L5420 goes way up.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
are the FMS configs on both servers identical?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
how can I check that? what are the files usually altered for the fms configuration?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
conf\server.xml
conf\_defaultRoot_\_defaultVHost_>VHost.xml
conf\_defaultRoot_\_defaultVHost_>Application.xml
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
wow thanks. what do I look for on this files? is it to optimize the fms? what values should I be looking for?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
check for differences on the failing and working servers... if there is such, try one by one from the working server)
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
thank you vayvanne, I will try that.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
the only difference was on the file
conf\_defaultRoot_\_defaultVHost_>Application.xml
where the original fms which is the failing server has
<!-- This section contains information about configuring the script engine. -->
<JSEngine>
<!-- This specifies the max size (Kb.) the runtime can grow to before -->
<!-- garbage collection is performed. -->
<RuntimeSize>1024</RuntimeSize>
on the working server the 1024 value has been replaced with 30720
would that be relevant?
