Mailing-List: contact tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
From: Roy Wilson <designrw@bellatlantic.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 23:58:13 GMT
Message-ID: <20001101.23581300@ALFRED.NORTH>
Subject: Can market-first/measure-later sustain TC growth?
To: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <3A00A841.BEFC87DD@olliance.com>
References: <39FF5F44.EFBA8BFF@eng.sun.com> <3A007A7A.C53F287F@olliance.com>
 <20001101.22021700@ALFRED.NORTH> <3A00A841.BEFC87DD@olliance.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Jason,

A matter of small importance, and of philosophy, but ...

<snip>


> The great thing about this is that
> it gets some people jazzed about the project without making any
> real, solid claims.

I think I'm ok on this.

> And, about the sentence that says "performs well under heavy
> load, even compared to the native Apache web server"..  This
> works the same way, since we're not saying which web server,
> nor running on which operating system, nor under what conditions.
> We're not even saying a major version number.  So why is it in
> here?  Because, I heard through the grapevine that someone ran
> some meaningful (but not necessarily bullet-proof) performance
> tests and had this finding: that the version of Catalina that
> was tested at the time performed about as well on most tests
> as the version of their native Apache web server did on the same
> tests.

But what if there happens to also be in the gv a story about someone who=
=20
has run some meaningful performance tests and found the contrary? To mix=
=20
metaphors, the can-o-worms that you don't want to open gets opened=20
anyway, does it not? =20

> I personally don't want to spend time validating that,
> nor would I want to be the one to try to defend the results
> (it would likely turn into another "Java's not as fast as C"
> arguement). =20

I agree with this, sort of.

> But, I believe it's possible, and I also believe
> that Catalina's web server performs quite nicely.

I am too am inclined to think that Catalina's webserver will perform wel=
l=20
enough to satisfy someone somewhere, but aren't you claiming more? =20

> Everyone should keep in mind that the purpose of our FAB is not
> to prove any performance numbers or to help engineers to
> understand Catalina's deep implementation details.  It's to make
> some not-so-technically-saavy readers want to help the project,
> promote the project, hire people to get it running and use it,
> etc.  We were primarily thinking of people like:

>  - CEOs, CTOs, and other management personnel
>  - Venture Capitalists
>  - Marketing staff
>  - [insert random Joe "Non-Technical" Businessman here]

I agree with the language used for the target audience, but see below.

> Reallly, people who don't know much about why their company
> should be interested in this thing called Catalina who aren't
> technically saavy enough to understand other docs that they
> can find about it (like the User docs, or other technical docs
> like the Classloader explanation doc or even the status doc..)
> How else can we each get permission to work full-time on cool
> projects like Catalina?  The better Catalina looks to both the
> technical and non-technical population at large, the more support
> the project will get overall, I think.

I think that the marketing-speak can't be broadcast until there is=20
technical data to support it in some fashion. Otherwise, perhaps, some=20
CEO/CTO/etc., asks a question that ultimately gets answered by a=20
technically savvy person such as yourself who (in the absence of=20
technical performance docs) might then be forced to reply "there's no=20
!#%?! evidence!"=20

I don't see how a market-first/measure-later approach can sustain growth=
=20
in Tomcat support. But, then, maybe you guys are simply getting the=20
market-speak in place :-).

Roy

--=20
Roy Wilson
E-mail: designrw@bellatlantic.net