nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

As we transition to the new Hyland Community, some post links may be temporarily disrupted as we finalize redirects. We apologize for the inconvenience and are working to resolve this as quickly as possible. Details.

[SOLVED] Why are CUD actions on DM much slower, then on WCM?

shmoula

Hi,
I'm wondering about weird performance issue, I did few measures on various (own or alfresco) webscripts:

WCM

create … 200ms
read … 60ms
update … 100ms
delete … 240ms

create … 570ms
read … 25ms (!)
update … 600ms (java backed webscript)
update … 600ms (js webscript)
update … 670ms (upload content servlet)
delete .. not tested

I tried to disable indexing (edited cm:content index enabled=false in contentModel.xml and then rebuilded indexes), but times are still the same. Why is DM operations much slower then WCM operations?

Thanks in advance!

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

mrogers

The AVM stuff is optimized differently and in general there's a lot less going on. For a couple of concrete examples AVM has far fewer policies and the security is lighter or even turned off for web content delivery. Or an author sandbox is not indexed. The content model for AVM is also far simpler.

It also depends upon which version of Alfresco you are using since performance has been leaping forwards for the last few releases.

That said your times look slow.

shmoula

Hi mrogers, thanks for reply!
I thought that and it makes me sad - I need to continuously import big amounts of data and it should be fast. Is there way to do it? Change content model, turn off security… where can I start?

Thank you
ps. I'm using community version 3.4.0.d

mrogers

There have been presentations on the large data import use case at the last two Alfresco DevCons, it may be worth looking at those.

On 3.4 indexing is probably the thing that slows down content ingestion, that's the first place to look.

However your times look slow so the next thing is probably to add some more RAM.

shmoula

Thanks for response, mrogers!
I'm going to try to install 4.0 right on blade, not inside Virtual just to try it out. Also I'm going to search some Alfresco DevCon stuff, hope it's somewhere on net. I'll be back when I do some research. Thank you.

shmoula

Ok, here are some results, i tried just upload servlet on various configurations, virtual, or not. Without indexing means disabledInTransactionIndexing (thanks to slides from DevCon). I also played with some JVM tuning, but impacts were minimal.

3.4.e on winXP, 64bit … 260ms (with indexing)
3.4.e on winXP, 64bit … 100ms (without indexing)
4.0 on winXP, 64bit … 70ms (!!)
3.4.e on linux, 32bit, virtual … 670ms (with indexing)
3.4.e on linux, 32bit, virtual … 170ms (without indexing)
3.4.e on linux, 64bit … 500ms (with indexing)

So my new question is: Is 4.0 backwards compatible with 3.4? Thank you.

Configurations, if anyone is interested on which environments I get those numbers:
== WinXP ==
Xeon 3.2GHz, 10GB ram

Server version: Apache Tomcat/6.0.29
Server built:   July 19 2010 1458
Server number:  6.0.0.29
OS Name:        Windows 2003
OS Version:     5.2
Architecture:   x86
JVM Version:    1.6.0_13-b03
JVM Vendor:     Sun Microsystems Inc.
‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍

== linux 32bit ==
Virtual machine under Virtualbox - 4cores, vtx, 4GB ram

Server version: Apache Tomcat/6.0.26
Server built:   March 9 2010 1805
Server number:  6.0.26.0
OS Name:        Linux
OS Version:     2.6.32-36-generic
Architecture:   i386
JVM Version:    1.6.0_18-b07
JVM Vendor:     Sun Microsystems Inc.
‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍

== linux 64bit ==
Phenom II X4 945, 4GB ram

Server version: Apache Tomcat/6.0.29
Server built:   July 19 2010 1458
Server number:  6.0.0.29
OS Name:        Linux
OS Version:     3.0.0-14-generic
Architecture:   amd64
JVM Version:    1.6.0_22-b04
JVM Vendor:     Sun Microsystems Inc.
‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍

shmoula

I tried to recompile our stuff with sdk from svn and everyting works fine under 4.0!!! So my performance problem is solved :-). Thank you

mrogers