Pinned topic Memory usage on Client
Answered question This question has been answered.
Unanswered question This question has not been answered yet.
I've been doing some testing with the XC10 device to manage session persistence compared to managing session persistence with a remote eXtreme Scale data grid. I've created large HTTP Sessions (4 x 1MB Objects) with low concurrent HTTP Session volumes (50 concurrent sessions). There doesn't seem to be any difference in the memory usage on the client between the XC10 and remote eXtreme Scale data grid. Surely this is not correct? Any input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Updated on 2011-01-19T09:48:27Z at 2011-01-19T09:48:27Z by SystemAdmin
Re: Memory usage on Client2011-01-18T15:23:11ZThis is the accepted answer. This is the accepted answer.Hi Ankia,
Sorry I don't understand why you'd expect different memory usage on the client given the two described configurations. In both cases the session objects will be held outside the process space of the client therefore I'd expect the client's memory to be the same in these scenarios.
bkmartin 120000K38911 Posts
Re: Memory usage on Client2011-01-19T02:37:44ZThis is the accepted answer. This is the accepted answer.
- SystemAdmin 110000D4XK
Re: Memory usage on Client2011-01-19T09:48:27ZThis is the accepted answer. This is the accepted answer.Thank you for your reply. I posted the question wrong. I meant to say that I tested session management with XC10 AS WELL AS a remote eXtremeScale grid and got very high memory usage on the client which I didn't expect. I compared these 2 scenarios to in-memory session management and off course didn't see a difference in memory usage due to the sessionTableSize property within the splicer.properties file being set to 2000. It now makes perfectly sense. Thank you so much.