tomcat-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Kientzle <kient...@acm.org>
Subject Re: Tomcat benchmarks from orionserver.com, Please comment. Important
Date Wed, 19 Jul 2000 18:22:22 GMT
I personally find it neither surprising nor disturbing that Tomcat 3.1
is slower than competing products right now.  Tomcat is a very
new project, and as with any new project, the first focus is on
stability and features.  Once the system generally does what people
need it to do, the developers can then move on to improve performance.

Given the number of people using Tomcat, performance will improve.
I'm comfortable with that; upgrading versions of Tomcat in the
future will be much easier for me than switching between very
different servers.  If you're building a new site and
expect to spend your first year building traffic, then Tomcat
might be a good choice; by the time you need it, Tomcat's
performance will be much better than it is today.

The best thing you can do to help is to use Tomcat, understand
how it works, and pass your suggestions (and fixes if you can)
back to the Tomcat developers.  Open-source projects thrive when
there is an active base of user/developers.  Right now, it appears
Tomcat has a real need for people to work on documentation, so
if you think you understand how to use Tomcat, volunteer to write
something.

Also keep in mind that Apache is somewhat unique among open-source
projects in being significantly faster than most of it's commercial
counterparts.  Since Tomcat is the reference implementation, it will
probably have to focus on features and portability, sometimes to the
detriment of performance.  It's quite possible that commercial
servlet engines will always be somewhat faster than Tomcat, although
that margin should shrink considerably once Tomcat is past its
infancy.

				- Tim

"Roytman, Alex" wrote:
> 
> According to Orion Tomcat 3.1 is almost 8 times slower than Orion or Resin.
> Are this fair results?
> Could someone from Jakarta team comment on it. We all like Tomcat, so please
> do say something
> 
> form Orion web site:
> Requests per second under the four different stress levels:
> 
> Server  1 x 1   4 x 1   8 x 2 (16)      16 x 4(64)
> Orion   615.00  622.36  597.1   579.89
> Tomcat  84.19   86.59   74.48   68.24
> JRun            386.17  387.62  370.1   306.34
> Resin   606.01  598.77  588.74  575.49
> Weblogic        122.55  124.28  125.73  116.81
> 
> see http://www.orionserver.com/benchmarks/benchmark.html
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chon-Chon Tang [mailto:ztang@weber.lcs.mit.edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 4:35 PM
> To: tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Tomcat benchmarks from orionserver.com
> 
> Hmm, first of all, apologies if this is the wrong list for this discussion
> (re-direct if a better one exists).
> 
> Caucho also has done quite a bit of back-patting on the performance of
> Resin on JSP/Servlet content serving.  Orion's performance seems similarly
> impressive... both appear to be on the order of 5-8 times faster than
> Tomcat, and in fact even superior to most (substantially more expensive)
> commercial products.
> 
> Has anyone out there had practical experiences with these less publicized
> servers?  Since Resin is also standards-meeting (both JSP and Servlet),
> why might I choose Tomcat over Resin on the short-term?  This isn't to
> demean the value of Jakarta and it's development efforts; I'm just trying
> to evaluate a product for the near term.
> 
> On Tue, 18 Jul 2000, Aleksey Tsalolikhin wrote:
> 
> > FYI, orionserver.com's benchmarks of Tomcat and several other
> > JSP engines, dated 17 July 2000:
> >
> > http://www.orionserver.com/benchmarks/benchmark.html
> >
> > Yours,
> > Aleksey Tsalolikhin
> >
> >
> >

Mime
View raw message