Re: Batch Immediate CGI =/= Interactive monster? -- MIDRANGE-L

Subject: Re: Batch Immediate CGI =/= Interactive monster?
From: Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 11:26:28 -0700 (PDT)
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

From: Luke Gerhardt
MADEUPNME QTMHHTP1 BCI 29.6 PGM-QZSRCGI RUN
MADEUPNME QTMHHTP1 BCI 27.4 PGM-QZSRCGI RUN

Yes, that's further evidence that either the JavaScript client is in a loop, and sending repeated requests to the server, or the RPG program is in a loop. If the JavaScript were in a loop then you'd probably also see high CPU utilization in the threaded HTTP server job, in addition to these CGI jobs. Otherwise the RPG programs may be in a loop.

If you had a lot of different clients hitting the server the loads would be distributed to many jobs. The fact that just 2-4 jobs have high CPU utilization suggest that you have just a few users, but something is probably in a loop.

IBM i HTTP and CGI interfaces run efficiently, but they don't protect us from our own logic.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.