standalone server versus embedding in tomcat

[Martin Redington <m....@ucl.ac.uk>]

My app will receive a significant, but not a massive load. I expect to 
receive batched requests (batched from the client, unless XML-RPC 
supports batched requests ... I haven't seen any documentation for it), 
in small batches of four or five.

The application is a digital assets management application. I expect 10 
to 20 concurrent users in my first installation, but I would like to be 
able to scale to hundreds or thousands of concurrent users.

Am I right in thinking that I am better off using a heavy-weight 
container, such as tomcat, rather than using the standalone servers?

    cheers,
         Martin

Re: standalone server versus embedding in tomcat

[Peter Carter <pe...@pbc.ottawa.on.ca>]

I have been writing a session engine (finished) for xml-rpc. My test 
was to write a file txfer program and nail the server with as many 
concurrent requests as possible.

As expected, the jvm on the server made the biggest impact, the second 
was the RPC server. What I did not expect, was that jserv, tomcat and 
iPlanet performed about 1/2-1/4 as good as the stand-alone Webserver 
class in XML-RPC library. I attribute this result to the webserver's 
throttling the thread usage and thunking overhead.

My tests transfered a 600mb file from 4x machines (1 macos10.2.1, 2 
sparc 10's, 1 netra X1, and 1 win2k) over a 100mbs link, with 200+ 
sessions total. I did say nail right? With one session active, I could 
txfer 1mbs wth the Webserver class and 256kish using the others.

I noticed that thread and cpu usage was way up on the Webserver class 
(assuming lots of activity was being processed), while the others would 
only give about 25% of a load.

If you want unbridled performance (relative, I guess) , use the 
Webserver class. If you need a speed governor or prevent a runnaway, 
use a servlet engine.

On Tuesday, October 29, 2002, at 01:46 PM, Danny Angus wrote:

> I would think so.
> Some people might suggest you look at resin too..
> d.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Martin Redington [mailto:m.redington@ucl.ac.uk]
>> Sent: 29 October 2002 18:34
>> To: rpc-user@xml.apache.org
>> Subject: standalone server versus embedding in tomcat
>>
>>
>>
>> My app will receive a significant, but not a massive load. I expect to
>> receive batched requests (batched from the client, unless XML-RPC
>> supports batched requests ... I haven't seen any documentation for 
>> it),
>> in small batches of four or five.
>>
>> The application is a digital assets management application. I expect 
>> 10
>> to 20 concurrent users in my first installation, but I would like to 
>> be
>> able to scale to hundreds or thousands of concurrent users.
>>
>> Am I right in thinking that I am better off using a heavy-weight
>> container, such as tomcat, rather than using the standalone servers?
>>
>>     cheers,
>>          Martin
>>
>

Re: standalone server versus embedding in tomcat

[Peter Carter <pe...@pbc.ottawa.on.ca>]

I have been writing a session engine (finished) for xml-rpc. My test 
was to write a file txfer program and nail the server with as many 
concurrent requests as possible.

As expected, the jvm on the server made the biggest impact, the second 
was the RPC server. What I did not expect, was that jserv, tomcat and 
iPlanet performed about 1/2-1/4 as good as the stand-alone Webserver 
class in XML-RPC library. I attribute this result to the webserver's 
throttling the thread usage and thunking overhead.

My tests transfered a 600mb file from 4x machines (1 macos10.2.1, 2 
sparc 10's, 1 netra X1, and 1 win2k) over a 100mbs link, with 200+ 
sessions total. I did say nail right? With one session active, I could 
txfer 1mbs wth the Webserver class and 256kish using the others.

I noticed that thread and cpu usage was way up on the Webserver class 
(assuming lots of activity was being processed), while the others would 
only give about 25% of a load.

If you want unbridled performance (relative, I guess) , use the 
Webserver class. If you need a speed governor or prevent a runnaway, 
use a servlet engine.

On Tuesday, October 29, 2002, at 01:46 PM, Danny Angus wrote:

> I would think so.
> Some people might suggest you look at resin too..
> d.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Martin Redington [mailto:m.redington@ucl.ac.uk]
>> Sent: 29 October 2002 18:34
>> To: rpc-user@xml.apache.org
>> Subject: standalone server versus embedding in tomcat
>>
>>
>>
>> My app will receive a significant, but not a massive load. I expect to
>> receive batched requests (batched from the client, unless XML-RPC
>> supports batched requests ... I haven't seen any documentation for 
>> it),
>> in small batches of four or five.
>>
>> The application is a digital assets management application. I expect 
>> 10
>> to 20 concurrent users in my first installation, but I would like to 
>> be
>> able to scale to hundreds or thousands of concurrent users.
>>
>> Am I right in thinking that I am better off using a heavy-weight
>> container, such as tomcat, rather than using the standalone servers?
>>
>>     cheers,
>>          Martin
>>
>

RE: standalone server versus embedding in tomcat

[Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>]

I would think so.
Some people might suggest you look at resin too..
d.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Redington [mailto:m.redington@ucl.ac.uk]
> Sent: 29 October 2002 18:34
> To: rpc-user@xml.apache.org
> Subject: standalone server versus embedding in tomcat
> 
> 
> 
> My app will receive a significant, but not a massive load. I expect to 
> receive batched requests (batched from the client, unless XML-RPC 
> supports batched requests ... I haven't seen any documentation for it), 
> in small batches of four or five.
> 
> The application is a digital assets management application. I expect 10 
> to 20 concurrent users in my first installation, but I would like to be 
> able to scale to hundreds or thousands of concurrent users.
> 
> Am I right in thinking that I am better off using a heavy-weight 
> container, such as tomcat, rather than using the standalone servers?
> 
>     cheers,
>          Martin
> 

RE: standalone server versus embedding in tomcat

[Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>]

I would think so.
Some people might suggest you look at resin too..
d.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Redington [mailto:m.redington@ucl.ac.uk]
> Sent: 29 October 2002 18:34
> To: rpc-user@xml.apache.org
> Subject: standalone server versus embedding in tomcat
> 
> 
> 
> My app will receive a significant, but not a massive load. I expect to 
> receive batched requests (batched from the client, unless XML-RPC 
> supports batched requests ... I haven't seen any documentation for it), 
> in small batches of four or five.
> 
> The application is a digital assets management application. I expect 10 
> to 20 concurrent users in my first installation, but I would like to be 
> able to scale to hundreds or thousands of concurrent users.
> 
> Am I right in thinking that I am better off using a heavy-weight 
> container, such as tomcat, rather than using the standalone servers?
> 
>     cheers,
>          Martin
>