Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-ws-axis-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 84889 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2004 03:35:53 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 23 Jun 2004 03:35:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 58323 invoked by uid 500); 23 Jun 2004 03:36:05 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-ws-axis-dev-archive@ws.apache.org Received: (qmail 58124 invoked by uid 500); 23 Jun 2004 03:36:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list axis-dev@ws.apache.org Received: (qmail 58052 invoked by uid 99); 23 Jun 2004 03:35:58 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.4 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_BY_IP,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [216.239.56.251] (HELO mproxy.gmail.com) (216.239.56.251) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.27.1) with SMTP; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 20:35:58 -0700 Received: by mproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id r62so91683cwc for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 20:35:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.11.117.27 with SMTP id p27mr503517cwc; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 20:35:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <19e0530f04062220354367a00f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 23:35:23 -0400 From: Davanum Srinivas Reply-To: dims@apache.org To: Apache AXIS C Developers List Subject: Re: Re: more results [Re: AXIS-C++ and AXIS-Java performance observations on Linux/Loopback Cc: dims@apache.org, axis-dev@ws.apache.org In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <40D77A56.6000606@cs.indiana.edu> <40D8BA66.9000905@cs.indiana.edu> <19e0530f04062219302133cb71@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Axis Java. I am basically unable to run the tests to repro the problem - http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=axis-c-dev&m=108795871520281&w=2 -- dims On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 22:20:53 -0500 (EST), Kenneth Chiu wrote: > > Alek is off-line till Saturday or so, so don't expect a > reply till then. > > By the way, were you referring to Axis C++ or Java? > > > On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > > Alek, > > > > would you be so kind as to help us pinpoint problems in Axis? This is > > exactly the right time to do it as we can try and fix the problems > > before 1.2 release. > > > > Thanks, > > dims > > > > On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 18:01:58 -0500, Aleksander Slominski > > wrote: > > > > > > now for client/server where services are hosted over very fast network > > > (Grid like environments): > > > www.extreme.indiana.edu/~aslom/bnp/wsperf/linux_xeon_sc/ > > > > > > comments about test results (or additional results) are welcome. > > > > > > thanks, > > > > > > alek > > > > > > Aleksander Slominski wrote: > > > > > > > hi, > > > > > > > > hope you find those results useful in identifying areas in AXIS-Java > > > > (memory footprint. performance) and AXIS-C++ (working on bigger sizes) > > > > that needs more work and will provide the biggest payoff (bang for > > > > buck :) ) - benchmark driver is very flexible and allows to execute > > > > only subset of tests to help timing when trying to fix one aspect only. > > > > > > > > i have update the benchmark results page [1] and added new tested > > > > services > > > > so currently there are results for AXIS-Java 1.2 streaming and non > > > > streaming > > > > (CVS June 11) and AXIS-C++ 1.2 pre-alpha (CVS May 28), gSOAP 2.6, > > > > XSOAP4 1.1.6-alpha4 > > > > > > > > tests were run on Linux Red Hat 7.3, Dell Optiplex GX 260T, > > > > Pentium 4 1.8 GHz 512 MB, JDK 1.4.2 (build 1.4.2_04-b05, mixed mode) > > > > using Java HotSpot(TM) Server VM over loopback network > > > > (that should eliminate any network interferences). > > > > > > > > code to reproduce tests results (except gSOAP) is available from [1]. > > > > > > > > > > > > Observations > > > > ---------------- > > > > it seems that AXIS-C++ HTTP transport is very inefficient as even for > > > > ping (echoVoid) method > > > > that has no body payload it was 4x slower than gSOAP or XSOAP4 (and > > > > CPU usage is 1/3 indicating > > > > that there is lot of IO waits or some other blocking ...) - later > > > > testing (i may send those results later) > > > > on real gigabit Ethernet network showed that AXIS-C++ ping is /only/ > > > > 2x slower than gSOAP ... > > > > > > > > it seems that AXIS-Java has huge memory leak - test was not completed > > > > as JVM ran out of memory > > > > even though it was started with -Xmx1024m (1GB!) and it actually > > > > managed not only to take > > > > all memory but also all swap space leading to machine freezing which > > > > is very bad sign > > > > if you plans to run AXIS-Java based services for this kind of payloads > > > > ... > > > > > > > > otherwise it seems that gSOAP is the fastest toolkit available and it > > > > especially shines when transferring large amount of data. XSOAP4 even > > > > though relatively new and in alpha stage is not yet optimized for > > > > performance turned out to be surprisingly stable and well performing > > > > (as for Java). > > > > > > > > comments are welcome. > > > > > > > > thanks, > > > > > > > > alek > > > > [1] http://www.extreme.indiana.edu/~aslom/bnp/wsperf/linux_loopback/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > The best way to predict the future is to invent it - Alan Kay > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/ > > > -- Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/