[Bill Bertera]

David, what server model are you running?

[Bill Bertera]

Max Drown wrote:

Hey, all you iPhone, BlackBerry users out there! Does anyone have a mobile app for supporting your cloverleaf interface remotely?

There’s a VNC app… never used it though.

[Bill Bertera]

Andre’ van Olden wrote:

Currently I am working on a project requiring conversion of xml to hl7.

[Bill Bertera]

Ric Cross wrote:

Bill Bertera wrote:

We’re starting to narrow down our problem, and the likely suspect is the model of Sun server we’re running…

.

You may want to compare your Solaris 10 semaphore settings to the Solaris 8 semaphore settings.

Another though less likely place to look is possibly comparing/tuning of the TCP/IP window frame size

semaphore settings we have taken care of with the new settings. And I’ll take a look at the TCP/IP window frame size. thanks for the suggestions.

EDIT:

our old & new servers are both set the same (assuming this is the setting you’re talking about):

/home/hci>ndd /dev/tcp tcp_cwnd_max

1048576

[Bill Bertera]

We’re starting to narrow down our problem, and the likely suspect is the model of Sun server we’re running.

This is what we “upgraded” to:

System = SunOS

Release = 5.10

Machine = sun4v sparc SUNW,SPARC-Enterprise-T5220

NumCPU = 64

Memory: 32G

Does anyone know any reason why Cloverleaf would have poor performance on this type of server? Or does anyone recommend any other model server?

Healthvision sent us their benchmark tests, but this model is not included.

[Bill Bertera]

thanks for the tips. We have indeed checked out the logs, and that’s also why we tested with several different interfaces to rule interface specific stuff out. And very basic straight TCP -> localhost TCP interfaces are taking twice as long. There’s even a visible delay in doing a “resend” of a large file to the engine. Pretty much everything Cloverleaf does on the new servers is taking longer.

[Bill Bertera]

Max Drown wrote:

Have you checked the logs for errors? Disk I/O such as a lot of logging can slow things down considerably.

How are you sending the data through? From one server to another? Site to site?

We’ve tried, sending the data TCP, file, hcicmd resend, just about every possible way. The important thing is that everything we’ve tested on the new server/OS/CLV we parallel test on our old server to compare. So we’re pretty sure its not the way we’ve built the interfaces, because the same interfaces on the old server is outperforming it by a large margin.

[Bill Bertera]

Max Drown wrote:

Quote:

experiencing major performance issues in our testing environment

Can you provide more detailed information on what you mean by “performance issues”?

We run a set number of messages through a test site, equal to our peak hours volume, and then twice our peak hours volume. On our old/current servers we can keep up with the 2X test. On the new servers our queues are backing up and having longer Xlate times on the 1X test. We’ve since ran other tests, as simple as 2 threads talking TCP/IP, and 1 thread routing to another. All of the tests are considerably slower on the new servers, that should be much more powerful.

[Bill Bertera]

I have a script that grabs the name/pass from odbc.ini for whatever datasource you’re connecting to. Is it possible to use multiple usernames for the same datasource?

[Bill Bertera]

thanks Rob, question about the “Delayed Connection” setting for TCP & PDL/TCPIP. If there are multiple messages in the OB-queue, does it keep the connection open as long as there are messages in the queue. or does it close & open for each message?

thanks

[Bill Bertera]

you can use multi-server ports. that way even though the first connection still thinks it up, it will allow a second connection. Your OS should eventually kill the first connection.

[Bill Bertera]

Any word on when we could expect a Rev for 5.6?

[Bill Bertera]

Thomas Rioux wrote:

This may be way too simple, but it sounds like you have the same port number on all the threads.  If that is the case and you have it set to localhost, then the scenario you mentioned sounds like something that can happen under those circumstances.   Can we get some more information about your set up?

Thanks…

Tom Rioux

It wouldn’t be a TCP confusion, that would have shown up in the smat files.

Thread 1 sends the thread 2 through a route, and the same for threads 3 & 4.

[Bill Bertera]

What version of Cloverleaf do you run? We have this problem, and I had it described to me as a bug in Cloverleaf, which I’ve heard is now fixed. Its due to the number of sites you run.

Basically, as it was described to me, is that there is an algorthm in Cloverleaf that assigns a semaphore key based on the name of the site. Apparently it isn’t too smart, and can assign the same semaphore key to multiple sites, so when the second site starts up it is not unique enough and you get that error. It is not actually a system-semaphore issue.

[Bill Bertera]

James Mestack wrote:

noticed post from Bill Bertera:  How do I tell or configure my Win 2K3 server to have TCP_KEEPALIVE running?

I think its a registry setting. Search for “KEEPALIVE” or “TCP”.

[Author]

Replies