EDITORIAL
Some time ago wrote an article (article link: Logback profile so written, TPS 10 times ), reaction is not bad, there are many users also expressed their views:
It boils down to this:
- logback performance testing of synchronous and asynchronous TPS or less
- 9102 years are still using logback
See the views of users and then continue to do the wave of testing and research
Server Hardware
- Six-core CPU
- 8G memory
test tools
- JMeter
- JProfile
- APM(New Relic)
logback logging framework synchronous and asynchronous test
There is a problem before the following test results:
- Test sample size is too small (ie, the number of threads and number of cycles performed little, before thread count of 100, 1 cycle, a total sample of 100)
- Test number is too small, had only one test, the result in accidental
- Two test results there is pollution, the number of samples is not the same
To solve the above problem, retest the number of threads will be changed to 200, 100 times each test cycle, the total number of samples to expand the number of samples 2w, and 200 times compared to the original test, and the test is repeated five times. The new test results are as follows:
New test results show that the use logback logging framework synchronous and asynchronous TPS output log way less. The data made into a bar graph more intuitive
But always felt asynchronous to write the log, access api thread will quickly respond to the client, TPS should have significant changes fishes. Can not figure went online access to some information, respond by saying APMperformance monitoring, synchronous and asynchronous TPS will have a greater difference, TPS is certainly there will be significant changes (cry), then use JMeter to send to monitor APM request ( JMeterparameter set to the number of threads 100, Ramp-up Period 0, 100 cycles): the APM test results are as follows:
Under APM monitoring, within five minutes to perform synchronization output log an average of 333rpm found TPS TPS synchronous and asynchronous comparison is not obvious
Although once again proved that the failure would not understand but later explored and friends, the sobering
TPS did not change significantly following reason: as the number of transactions per second TPS, each transaction includes the following three processes:
- The user requests the server
- The server's own internal processing
- Server returned to the user
Own internal server request comprises accessing a database, the processing logic and print logs, synchronous and asynchronous only difference is in the way the printing log. From the test results, print log API access request takes only 5.3%, so the shortened time-consuming print log can not obviously improve the TPS, because the print time and network requests, time-consuming business processes negligible but the test results indicates that, although not significantly improve the asynchronous output TPS, but can reduce time-consuming printing logs. So use logback logging framework is recommended to use asynchronous output
Recommended log4j2 instead logback
log4j2 is an upgraded version of log4j 1.x, reference to some excellent design logback, and fixes some problems, brought some significant improvement, performance in terms of asynchronous been a huge boost, which in addition to providing Async Append asynchronous implementation also provided outside Async Log asynchronously, wherein Async Append asynchronous and asynchronous manner similar logback implementation, based on the Async Log LMAX Disruptor library, to achieve a high-performance asynchronous recorder. log4j2 asynchronous implementation of this test is based on Async Log. JMeter logback test parameters and test as before, threads 200, 100 cycles, repeated five. Logj2日志配置文件基本和 logback same configuration and asynchronous satisfy:
- Console Print Log
- Categories output log
- By day rolling
- The same log output format
Test results are as follows:
TPS promoted 6 times! ! ! And print logs takes almost no statistics to come out of the official test report, log4j2 and logback performance compared to more obvious. Attached official test report: Asynchronous Loggers Logging for Low-Latency
in conclusion
- If you use logback framework, it is recommended to use asynchronous mode output log
- Select the logging framework, recommended log4j2
Last Attachment: test code
Original difficult, if reproduced, please indicate the source: https: //juejin.im/post/5d66a36c518825199701e2ad Author: how sweet it in
In addition to reprint a reward little money can do, recently playing docker, really want to buy a MacBookPro, although bought a low-performance Linux server may still want to buy a mbp