geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alan D. Cabrera" <>
Subject Re: Initial Performance Measurements of Geronimo Using DayTrader - Bottom Line ... we're gonna mix it up :)
Date Thu, 13 Oct 2005 21:51:09 GMT
This is way cool.


Matt Hogstrom wrote, On 10/7/2005 12:58 PM:

> I have performance tested M5 (or thereabouts) using DayTrader (a 
> performance sample in Geronimo currently located in the sandbox).
> The results of the testing I think are quite compelling as Geronimo 
> just passed CTS certification at M5.
> I used a metric called a "Target" in the testing.  This metric is 
> comprised of Open Source and Commercial AppServers.  As we make 
> changes to improve performance when we meet the "Target" we will be 
> competitively positioned.
> The WebContainer primitives are a bit misleading as they are really 
> contrasting Jetty (Geronimo's default) Tomcat and commercial 
> offerings.  We need to fix Geronimo to improve performance by allowing 
> HTTP logging to be disabled.
> As we move up the stack and include higher level functions (like DB 
> read and writes) we find that Geronimo is well positioned against the 
> target.  Prepared Statement caching will move us to close to the 
> target I expect.
> The EJB primitives may seem poor at the moment.  Although, my gut 
> tells me that we are copying parms inappropriately and we'll make  
> significant performance improvements as we address this issue.
> Overall Geronimo is within 70% of our competitive target for Trade 
> Direct Performance which is awesome.  This metric includes Servlets, 
> JSPs, EJBs and messaging to name a few of the J2EE artifacts.  At this 
> point in the cycle we should be able to close the gap and make our 
> competitive target by 1.0.
> Attached is a set of slides that explains the testing, benchmark and 
> results. Please take a few minutes to review and hats off to the team 
> so far.  We are going to make Geronimo a force to be reckoned with by 
> 1.0 which is coming soon.
> - Matt

View raw message