http://bit.ly/MicrosoftCRMfreeTrial - - - - - This free no-obligation 30 day trial below allows you to kick-off your MS Dynamics CRM review and test Microsoft’s CRM system for 30 days at no charge. Executive Summary This white paper outlines some of the performance benchmarks and scalability testing SugarCRM has undergone with its product set. This report shall cover the following test scenarios: 1. Scalability of a Single Server With NFS 2. Horizontal Scalability Through Multiple Web Servers 3. Performance Benchmarks for 600 Concurrent Users With NFS Introduction The performance and scalability test results below exhibit how the SugarCRM application performs with many users attempting to access data at the same time. This white paper details the results of tests executed against Sugar Enterprise Edition version 6.0.2 running against MySQL version 5.0.91. The cluster was configured with four web servers and two databases servers. Each server configuration used in this series of tests was a dual processor, quad core Intel-based server with 8 gigs of RAM. For more information regarding the data volume and server response time by action for these tests, please see the appendices at the end of this document.

1. SugarCRM Scalability and
Performance Benchmarks
TECHNICAL W HITE PA P ER

2. SugarCRM Scalability and Performance Benchmarks
Executive Summary
This white paper outlines some of the performance benchmarks
and scalability testing SugarCRM has undergone with its product
set. This report shall cover the following test scenarios:
1. Scalability of a Single Server With NFS
2. Horizontal Scalability Through Multiple Web Servers
3. Performance Benchmarks for 600 Concurrent Users With NFS
Introduction
The performance and scalability test results below exhibit how the
SugarCRM application performs with many users attempting to
access data at the same time. This white paper details the results of
tests executed against Sugar Enterprise Edition version 6.0.2 run-
ning against MySQL version 5.0.91. The cluster was configured with
four web servers and two databases servers. Each server configura-
tion used in this series of tests was a dual processor, quad core
Intel-based server with 8 gigs of RAM. For more information regard-
ing the data volume and server response time by action for these
tests, please see the appendices at the end of this document.
1
Copyright © 2010 SugarCRM, Inc. All rights reserved.

3. SugarCRM Scalability and Performance Benchmarks
Section 1:
Scalability of a Single Server With NFS
This benchmark describes the scalability of the SugarCRM appli-
cation running on a single web server with a separate clustered
database server. The files for this instance are stored on a net-
worked file system (nfs). This test was performed in several phases
where the same load test script was executed with an increasing
number of users.
18000
16000
Response Time (milliseconds)
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
50 100 150 200 300
Number of Users
This chart shows that the SugarCRM application maintains a sub 600-millisecond response time
between 50 concurrent users and 150 concurrent. At 150 concurrent users the average response
time comes in at 531 ms per request. The SugarCRM application response time degrades below
a maximum acceptable threshold of 2000 ms per request at approximately 300 concurrent users
with a response time of 17090 ms. Based on this test it is recommended to run each server with
150 concurrent users.
2
Copyright © 2010 SugarCRM, Inc. All rights reserved.

4. SugarCRM Scalability and Performance Benchmarks
Section 2:
Horizontal Scalability Through Multiple Web Servers
The previous test demonstrated that a single web server could
scale comfortably to 150 users. By adding additional web servers,
this test demonstrates the ability of SugarCRM to scale horizon-
tally. This configuration includes four web servers running the same
instance of SugarCRM. A networked file system (NFS) is utilized to
keep the SugarCRM instance’s files in sync across the four web
servers. Requests are distributed across the servers using a round
robin method through an nginx load balancer. Sessions are stored
in a memcache pool to allow for user’s to maintain their sessions
across web servers.
5000
4500
Response Time (milliseconds)
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
NFS
1500
1000
500
0
200 400 600 800 1000
Number of Users
This chart shows that the SugarCRM application maintains an acceptable response time between
200 concurrent users at a 489 milliseconds (ms) average response time per request and 600
concurrent users at a 577 ms average response time per request. At 800 concurrent users the
response time increases to 1050 ms. The instance degrades below an acceptable response time
at 1000 users where it comes in at 4566 ms. This test shows that by adding additional web
servers one can continue to scale out their SugarCRM instance. Based on this observations the
recommend number of servers in a cluster is the ceiling of the maximum number of concurrent
users dived by 150.
3
Copyright © 2010 SugarCRM, Inc. All rights reserved.

5. SugarCRM Scalability and Performance Benchmarks
Section 3
Performance Benchmarks for 600 Concurrent Users
With NFS
This test demonstrates that a clustered web server configuration of
the SugarCRM application can maintain a consistent response time
under two seconds with a load of 600 concurrent users performing
a realistic mix of business functions in the application.
For this test, the average server response time for all pages was 577
ms. The percentage of response times below one second was 90%.
25000
20000
# of Requests
15000
10000
5000
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Time(seconds)
This chart shows the number of requests that fall into each response time window. For example,
more than 19,000 requests saw a response time of between 0.4 and 0.5 seconds in this
clustered web server run with 600 concurrent users.
4
Copyright © 2010 SugarCRM, Inc. All rights reserved.

6. SugarCRM Scalability and Performance Benchmarks
Conclusions
Based on these tests, SugarCRM recommends a maximum of 150
concurrent users per web server in order to achieve sub-second
responses at least 80 percent of the time. For a typical CRM
deployment, this typically equates to 600 named sales force users
(20% of named users using the application concurrently) or 300
contact center users (50% of named users using the application
concurrently) per web server. As shown in this white paper, the
Sugar application scales linearly to accommodate more users by
simply adding more web servers to the cluster configuration.
5
Copyright © 2010 SugarCRM, Inc. All rights reserved.

7. SugarCRM Scalability and Performance Benchmarks
Appendix A – Data Volume
For these runs, all test used a database with over 2,292,200 rows
of data. The details of the seed data are below. The total includes
the main objects and the relationship rows that link the data
together.
Business Objects Records
Teams 400
Email Addresses 120000
Users 2000
Accounts 10000
Product Bundles 20000
Products 40000
Calls 240000
Emails 160000
Contacts 40000
Leads 40000
Opportunities 20000
Cases 40000
Bugs 30000
Meetings 80000
Tasks 40000
Notes 40000
Documents 10000
Core Records 932400
Total Records 2292200
Database Size: 1.98 GB
Database Size with Indexes: 2.86 GB
6
Copyright © 2010 SugarCRM, Inc. All rights reserved.

8. SugarCRM Scalability and Performance Benchmarks
Appendix B – Single Server NFS Response Times
Number Of Users Avg. Response Time Number of Requests
50 586.17 5423
100 510.56 10874
150 531.49 16316
200 997.619 21367
300 17090.79 21015
7
Copyright © 2010 SugarCRM, Inc. All rights reserved.

9. SugarCRM Scalability and Performance Benchmarks
Appendix C – Results for a 600 user four server cluster
with NFS
This test took one hour with each action being executed at least
once by each user. More common actions, such as the various List
and Detail Views, were executed with a higher frequency to simu-
late a more realistic use case. The resulting test executions put
minimal loads on the database and web servers.
Below is a breakdown of the server response time by action. The
action on the left is a typical task performed by a user or the sys-
tem. The average response time is how long that request took in
terms of a server round trip in milliseconds. The number of requests
is the number of times that particular action was performed during
the load test.
Action Avg. Response Time Number Of Requests
Login Screen 81.9 600
Login 2284.57 600
Notes List View 574.74 4192
Opportunities List View 580.21 4151
Contacts List View 808.38 4163
Note Detail View 427.3 4144
Task List View 537.46 4207
Leads List View 758.73 4161
Case List View 553.9 4179
Opportunity Detail View 670.23 4099
Accounts List View 705.09 4191
Lead Detail View 636.94 4112
Task Detail View 447.89 4159
Account Detail View 992.71 4142
Case Detail View 558.39 4135
Quick Create Opportunity 871.48 2065
Quick Create Contact 1058.51 600
Quick Create Account 924.77 600
Quick Create Task 590.38 600
Quick Create Case 800.39 600
Delete Contact 1478.62 600
Quick Create Note 639.55 600
Delete Task 1098.55 600
Delete Account 1430.3 600
Delete Case 1088.37 600
Delete Opportunity 1115.66 600
Quick Create Lead 858.12 600
Delete Note 931.29 600
Delete Lead 1076.76 600
8
Copyright © 2010 SugarCRM, Inc. All rights reserved.

10. SugarCRM Scalability and Performance Benchmarks
Response Time Spread
This table shows response times broken down in time intervals of 100 milliseconds. Each time inter-
val has the number of requests, the percentage of all requests, and the cumulative sum of all
responses that came within the upper bound of the interval.
As an example, the test goal was 80% of all responses in less than 1 second. The cumulative sum
of the 0.9-1.0 second bucket is 90.54%. This means that 90% of all requests returned in less than 1
second. 99% of all requests returned in less than 3.3 seconds.
Time in Seconds # of Requests % Responses Sum % of Responses
0 - 0.1 1960 2.29 2.29
0.1 - 0.2 97 0.11 2.4
0.2 - 0.3 2231 2.6 5
0.3 - 0.4 21711 25.34 30.34
0.4 - 0.5 21144 24.68 55.02
0.5 - 0.6 12682 14.8 69.82
0.6 - 0.7 8788 10.26 80.08
0.7 - 0.8 3117 3.64 83.72
0.8 - 0.9 2953 3.45 87.17
0.9 - 1 2207 2.58 89.75
1 - 1.1 2043 2.38 92.13
1.1 - 1.2 1133 1.32 93.45
1.2 - 1.3 811 0.95 94.4
1.3 - 1.4 534 0.62 95.02
1.4 - 1.5 431 0.5 95.52
1.5 - 1.6 301 0.35 95.87
1.6 - 1.7 260 0.3 96.17
1.7 - 1.8 225 0.26 96.43
1.8 - 1.9 241 0.28 96.71
1.9 - 2 186 0.22 96.93
2 - 2.1 177 0.21 97.14
2.1 - 2.2 147 0.17 97.31
2.2 - 2.3 160 0.19 97.5
2.3 - 2.4 123 0.14 97.64
2.4 - 2.5 119 0.14 97.78
2.5 - 2.6 104 0.12 97.9
2.6 - 2.7 92 0.11 98.01 Total round trips: 65100
2.7 - 2.8 99 0.12 98.13 Average response time for all pages: 577 ms
Responses under 1 second: 90%
2.8 - 2.9 132 0.15 98.28
2.9 - 3 126 0.15 98.43 Average response times are calculated
3 - 3.1 149 0.17 98.6 excluding the top and bottom 3% of requests
3.1 - 3.2 103 0.12 98.72
3.2 - 3.3 97 0.11 98.83
3.3 - 3.4 94 0.11 98.94
3.4 - 3.5 69 0.08 99.02
9
Copyright © 2010 SugarCRM, Inc. All rights reserved.

11. SugarCRM Scalability and Performance Benchmarks
Appendix D – Load Test Cluster Diagram
Load Balancer
(nginx)
Web Server 1 Web Server 2 Web Server 3 Web Server 4
(apache, php, apc) (apache, php, apc) (apache, php, apc) (apache, php, apc)
Database Database
(mysql) (mysql)
Session Manager NFS Master Master DB Replication
(memcache) (netapp) (single virtual ip address)
10
Copyright © 2010 SugarCRM, Inc. All rights reserved.

12. SugarCRM Scalability and Performance Benchmarks
MySQL Configuration Optimization
[mysqld]
max_allowed_packet=16M
max_connections = 2500
max_user_connections = 2500
wait_timeout = 120
log_slow_queries
long_query_time = 1
log_queries_not_using_indexes
innodb_log_file_size=128M
# comment these in when benchmarking & prove results
innodb_flush_method=O_DIRECT
query_cache_size=256M
query_cache_limit=2M
tmp_table_size=64M
innodb_additional_mem_pool_size=8M
thread_concurrency=24
record_buffer=2M
#query_cache_size=128M
query_cache_type=1
key_buffer_size=64M
table_cache=2048
default-storage-engine=InnoDB
innodb_buffer_pool_size=3072M
myisam_recover=BACKUP,FORCE
[safe_mysqld]
myisam_recover=BACKUP,FORCE
err-log=/var/log/mysql/mysqld.log
pid-file=/var/lib/mysql/mysqld.pid
11
Copyright © 2010 SugarCRM, Inc. All rights reserved.

13. SugarCRM Scalability and Performance Benchmarks
Apache Configuration Optimization
# prefork MPM
# StartServers: number of server processes to start
# MinSpareServers: minimum number of server processes which are kept spare
# MaxSpareServers: maximum number of server processes which are kept spare
# ServerLimit: maximum value for MaxClients for the lifetime of the server
# MaxClients: maximum number of server processes allowed to start
# MaxRequestsPerChild: maximum number of requests a server process serves
Timeout 30
KeepAlive On
MaxKeepAliveRequests 100
KeepAliveTimeout 2
MinSpareServers 16
MaxSpareServers 24
StartServers 20
MaxClients 256
MaxRequestsPerChild 5000
LimitRequestFields 50
12
Copyright © 2010 SugarCRM, Inc. All rights reserved.

14. SugarCRM, Inc.
1 0050 N or th Wolfe Road
SW2- 130
C uper tino, CA 95014
T: 408.454.6 900
F: 408.873.2872
www.sugarcrm.com
04-10-020a
Copyright © 2010 SugarCRM, Inc. All rights reserved. SugarCRM and the SugarCRM logo are registered trademarks of SugarCRM, Inc.
in the United States, the European Union and other countries. All other trademarks are the properties of their respective companies.