deltacloud-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martyn Taylor <mtay...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: Twitter move to Java
Date Fri, 16 Nov 2012 14:36:00 GMT
On 11/16/2012 02:28 PM, Michal Fojtik wrote:
> On Nov 16, 2012, at 3:02 PM, Dmitri Dolguikh <dmitri@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Interesting. We had a great session with Charles Nutter (jruby contrib) last
> night, discussing various issues that MRI has with garbage collecting.
> My personal impression is that jRuby rocks when it come to long running
> processes (or web applications). JVM can actually handle GC and memory a way
> better than MRI do.
>
> So I did a quick test yesterday night (or today morning ;-) where I tried
> to use TorqueBox to run Deltacloud API and then do a benchmark using 'ab'
> command (1000 request, concurrency set to 5) and I got interesting results:
>
> 1. Deltacloud API works like a charm on jRuby (no problem, no exceptions, ...)
> 2. The performance is 2x better with jRuby than using MRI
> 3. Using MRI with 'thin' reveals that 5% of requests just failed without any reason,
>     where using jRuby all request were served properly.
> 4. The memory used by both are almost the same (well JVM use a bit more memory, but
>     at least it does not grow ;-)
>
> There are two drawbacks that I observed:
>
> 1. The boot time of JVM (jRuby) is a bit longer than MRI - but that is not an issue.
> 2. There is no code reloader for Sinatra in Torquebox (at least I tried to find one
>     but no luck)
>
> So to wrap this up, I'm very surprised by the jRuby performance and also by compatibility
> between MRI and jRuby (1.7.0).
>
> If you want to try it out and you use rvm or rbenv, it is easy to install jruby (1.7.0).
> Then after you install it and enable it, just install 'gem install torquebox-server'
(100MB ;)
> and in 'server' dir just run:
>
> $ torquebox deploy
> $ torquebox run
Or you can follow my tutorial "Ruby on Rails on torqueBox" here: 
http://martyntaylor.fedorapeople.org/jbug/doc/rdoc/0_index_rdoc.html
> You don't need to modify anything, DC will be spawn on port 8080 (not 3001). Also TorqueBox
> include many features from EAP, like background jobs, messaging, caches, etc.


>
>    -- Michal
>
>> On 16/11/12 01:45 PM, Giulio Fidente wrote:
>>> On 11/16/2012 01:57 PM, Martyn Taylor wrote:
>>>> Worryingly...
>>>>
>>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/08/twitter_epic_traffic_saved_by_java/
>>>>
>>>> Let's all not jump ship just yet!
>>> Now, not to start any war on programming languages but I always tought
>>> that the JVM was faster [1] (for cpu bound and memory bound tasks)
>>> mainly because has got strong and static typing.
>>>
>>> But is it just that?
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> http://blog.dhananjaynene.com/2008/07/performance-comparison-c-java-python-ruby-jython-jruby-groovy/
>> JVM is pretty great. Note that Twitter projects are not using Java however, but rather
Scala (and clojure), neither of which outperforms Java. I think it's not really a testament
to how fast Java is, but rather to how badly ruby VM sucks.
>>
>> -d
> Michal Fojtik
> http://deltacloud.org
> mfojtik@redhat.com
>
>
>



Mime
View raw message