You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@felix.apache.org by Frank Langel <fr...@frankjlangel.com> on 2015/04/14 11:27:47 UTC
Jetty vs Undertow
When using Felix http module in performance critical applications, Jetty
seems to underperform compared to modern servlet libraries such as undertow
or netty:
https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r9&hw=peak&test=json
Has/Is anyone working on a plug-in replacement for Undertow/Netty. Any
experience/performance measurements? Any plans?
Thanks a lot in advance
Frank
Re: Jetty vs Undertow
Posted by Nick Baker <nb...@pentaho.com>.
Thanks Achim. I’ll join that mailing list today and start investigating
this work.
-Nick
On 4/14/15, 9:47 AM, "Achim Nierbeck" <bc...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>Hi Nick,
>
>Right now the "backlog" is a bit thin [1], but help is certainly
>appreciated :)
>The main issue PAXWEB-771 still needs to collect the items to do.
>But right now neither Harald or I do have a lot of free cycles for it :(
>It might be better to move this discussion to the ops4j mailinglist,
>that's
>why I cross posted this answer.
>
>regards, Achim
>[1] - https://ops4j1.jira.com/projects/PAXWEB/issues
>
>2015-04-14 15:41 GMT+02:00 Nick Baker <nb...@pentaho.com>:
>
>> We (Pentaho) can help with this. We¹d like to transition off Tomcat
>> clusters to Karaf instances. One of the issues with this migration we¹ve
>> identified is Jetty performance. Our next release will go out Tomcat
>>with
>> Karaf embedded, Felix HTTP Bridge spanning the two. Not where we want to
>> be! What¹s the timeframe for the merge? Do you have a backlog of issues
>> related to this? Let us know how we can help.
>>
>> -Nick Baker
>>
>> On 4/14/15, 7:31 AM, "Achim Nierbeck" <bc...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Hi,
>> >
>> >nope it's actually Pax-Web 5.0 M1 and M2 (from the pax-web-undertow
>> >branch)
>> >which uses undertow only. And it's none of the fabric8 developers it's
>> >Harald Wellmann, who also takes care of the Pax Exam.
>> >
>> >Right now I'm trying to find a way of having undertow as the third
>> >supported container for pax web, to merge the pax-web-undertow
>> >branch into the Pax-Web main branch for a 5.0
>> >Help appreciated by the way ;)
>> >
>> >regards, Achim
>> >
>> >
>> >2015-04-14 13:28 GMT+02:00 Nick Baker <nb...@pentaho.com>:
>> >
>> >> I could have swore one of the fabric8 developers was working on a
>> >> pax-web-wildfly which is undertow-based. Not finding it via search.
>> >>
>> >> -Nick
>> >> Original Message
>> >> From: Rob Walker
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 5:44 AM
>> >> To: users@felix.apache.org
>> >> Reply To: users@felix.apache.org
>> >> Subject: Re: Jetty vs Undertow
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Interesting. Jetty is quite a long way down that graph compared to
>> >>those.
>> >>
>> >> I know Richard (founder of Oscar which became Felix) was always
>> >> interested in light/fast HttpService implementations. Could be an
>> >> interesting little side project.
>> >>
>> >> Wiring Jetty into the very original OSGi HttpService interface didn't
>> >> actually take that much work, although I haven't been back to the
>>spec
>> >> of late to see what's changed or been added that might make things
>> >>harder
>> >>
>> >> -- Rob
>> >>
>> >> On 14/04/2015 11:27, Frank Langel wrote:
>> >> > When using Felix http module in performance critical applications,
>> >>Jetty
>> >> > seems to underperform compared to modern servlet libraries such as
>> >> undertow
>> >> > or netty:
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r9&hw=peak&test=json
>> >> >
>> >> > Has/Is anyone working on a plug-in replacement for Undertow/Netty.
>>Any
>> >> > experience/performance measurements? Any plans?
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks a lot in advance
>> >> > Frank
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Ascert - Taking systems to the edge
>> >> robw@ascert.com
>> >> SA +27 21 300 2028
>> >> UK +44 20 7488 3470 ext 5119
>> >> www.ascert.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >--
>> >
>> >Apache Member
>> >Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
>> >OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/>
>>Committer &
>> >Project Lead
>> >blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
>> >Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS>
>> >
>> >Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>
>Apache Member
>Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
>OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer &
>Project Lead
>blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
>Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS>
>
>Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
Re: Jetty vs Undertow
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@apache.org>.
Am 15.04.15 um 16:51 schrieb Neil Bartlett:
> It would be really great to have a Felix implementation of the new Http Whiteboard specification from OSGi R6!
>
I assume you mean an implementation not using Jetty?
The current trunk of the http implementation in Felix nearly implements
the http whiteboard spec completely. Writing an implementation on
something else than jetty shouldn't be too hard, one could use the jetty
based impl as a starting point.
Regards
Carsten
--
Carsten Ziegeler
Adobe Research Switzerland
cziegeler@apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
Re: Jetty vs Undertow
Posted by Neil Bartlett <nj...@gmail.com>.
It would be really great to have a Felix implementation of the new Http Whiteboard specification from OSGi R6!
Regards,
Neil
> On 15 Apr 2015, at 15:42, Frank Langel <fr...@frankjlangel.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Rob,
>
> netty.io is more independent and has way fewer and cleaner dependencies as
> far as I can see. Therefore, I am leaning towards netty.io as well. Most
> important though would be to pick one implementation and focus on that
> implementation, not split effort between netty.io and undertow. As a
> second requirement, the http stack should be light, I wouldn’t want to
> carry around half a jboss in my http-undertow bundle :=)
>
> Best
> Frank
>
> On 4/15/15, 1:54 PM, "Rob Walker" <ro...@ascert.com> wrote:
>
>> Done a bit of background reading and both netty and undertow sound
>> interesting - they both score pretty high on the performance graph
>> linked to in the OP.
>>
>> Any particular reason to go undertow vs netty. Seems netty started in
>> JBOSS but then move solo when they wanted a more to-the-metal approach
>> which became undertow. Netty seems a bit more feature rich at this
>> stage, which could perhaps be useful/interesting.
>>
>> Of course the beauty of OSGi and projects like Felix etc is that there's
>> no reason not to have multiple HttpService implementations, assuming
>> there are enough contributors.
>>
>> FWIW - our Felix project is on a very old cut of the Jetty based service
>> and I have a background action to move to a newer one. I'm not sure I'll
>> have time to help in implementing a netty/undertow based implementation
>> (although I haven't ruled that out) - but could be a guinea pig in
>> helping test it out in a real OSGi based App.
>>
>> -- Rob
>>
>> On 14/04/2015 15:47, Achim Nierbeck wrote:
>>> Hi Nick,
>>>
>>> Right now the "backlog" is a bit thin [1], but help is certainly
>>> appreciated :)
>>> The main issue PAXWEB-771 still needs to collect the items to do.
>>> But right now neither Harald or I do have a lot of free cycles for it :(
>>> It might be better to move this discussion to the ops4j mailinglist,
>>> that's
>>> why I cross posted this answer.
>>>
>>> regards, Achim
>>> [1] - https://ops4j1.jira.com/projects/PAXWEB/issues
>>>
>>> 2015-04-14 15:41 GMT+02:00 Nick Baker <nb...@pentaho.com>:
>>>
>>>> We (Pentaho) can help with this. We¹d like to transition off Tomcat
>>>> clusters to Karaf instances. One of the issues with this migration
>>>> we¹ve
>>>> identified is Jetty performance. Our next release will go out Tomcat
>>>> with
>>>> Karaf embedded, Felix HTTP Bridge spanning the two. Not where we want
>>>> to
>>>> be! What¹s the timeframe for the merge? Do you have a backlog of issues
>>>> related to this? Let us know how we can help.
>>>>
>>>> -Nick Baker
>>>>
>>>> On 4/14/15, 7:31 AM, "Achim Nierbeck" <bc...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> nope it's actually Pax-Web 5.0 M1 and M2 (from the pax-web-undertow
>>>>> branch)
>>>>> which uses undertow only. And it's none of the fabric8 developers it's
>>>>> Harald Wellmann, who also takes care of the Pax Exam.
>>>>>
>>>>> Right now I'm trying to find a way of having undertow as the third
>>>>> supported container for pax web, to merge the pax-web-undertow
>>>>> branch into the Pax-Web main branch for a 5.0
>>>>> Help appreciated by the way ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> regards, Achim
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 2015-04-14 13:28 GMT+02:00 Nick Baker <nb...@pentaho.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I could have swore one of the fabric8 developers was working on a
>>>>>> pax-web-wildfly which is undertow-based. Not finding it via search.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Nick
>>>>>> Original Message
>>>>>> From: Rob Walker
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 5:44 AM
>>>>>> To: users@felix.apache.org
>>>>>> Reply To: users@felix.apache.org
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Jetty vs Undertow
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Interesting. Jetty is quite a long way down that graph compared to
>>>>>> those.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know Richard (founder of Oscar which became Felix) was always
>>>>>> interested in light/fast HttpService implementations. Could be an
>>>>>> interesting little side project.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wiring Jetty into the very original OSGi HttpService interface didn't
>>>>>> actually take that much work, although I haven't been back to the
>>>>>> spec
>>>>>> of late to see what's changed or been added that might make things
>>>>>> harder
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- Rob
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 14/04/2015 11:27, Frank Langel wrote:
>>>>>>> When using Felix http module in performance critical applications,
>>>>>> Jetty
>>>>>>> seems to underperform compared to modern servlet libraries such as
>>>>>> undertow
>>>>>>> or netty:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r9&hw=peak&test=jso
>>>> n
>>>>>>> Has/Is anyone working on a plug-in replacement for Undertow/Netty.
>>>>>>> Any
>>>>>>> experience/performance measurements? Any plans?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks a lot in advance
>>>>>>> Frank
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ascert - Taking systems to the edge
>>>>>> robw@ascert.com
>>>>>> SA +27 21 300 2028
>>>>>> UK +44 20 7488 3470 ext 5119
>>>>>> www.ascert.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Apache Member
>>>>> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
>>>>> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/>
>>>>> Committer &
>>>>> Project Lead
>>>>> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
>>>>> Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS>
>>>>>
>>>>> Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> Ascert - Taking systems to the edge
>> robw@ascert.com
>> SA +27 21 300 2028
>> UK +44 20 7488 3470 ext 5119
>> www.ascert.com
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
Re: Jetty vs Undertow
Posted by Frank Langel <fr...@frankjlangel.com>.
Thanks Rob,
netty.io is more independent and has way fewer and cleaner dependencies as
far as I can see. Therefore, I am leaning towards netty.io as well. Most
important though would be to pick one implementation and focus on that
implementation, not split effort between netty.io and undertow. As a
second requirement, the http stack should be light, I wouldn’t want to
carry around half a jboss in my http-undertow bundle :=)
Best
Frank
On 4/15/15, 1:54 PM, "Rob Walker" <ro...@ascert.com> wrote:
>Done a bit of background reading and both netty and undertow sound
>interesting - they both score pretty high on the performance graph
>linked to in the OP.
>
>Any particular reason to go undertow vs netty. Seems netty started in
>JBOSS but then move solo when they wanted a more to-the-metal approach
>which became undertow. Netty seems a bit more feature rich at this
>stage, which could perhaps be useful/interesting.
>
>Of course the beauty of OSGi and projects like Felix etc is that there's
>no reason not to have multiple HttpService implementations, assuming
>there are enough contributors.
>
>FWIW - our Felix project is on a very old cut of the Jetty based service
>and I have a background action to move to a newer one. I'm not sure I'll
>have time to help in implementing a netty/undertow based implementation
>(although I haven't ruled that out) - but could be a guinea pig in
>helping test it out in a real OSGi based App.
>
>-- Rob
>
>On 14/04/2015 15:47, Achim Nierbeck wrote:
>> Hi Nick,
>>
>> Right now the "backlog" is a bit thin [1], but help is certainly
>> appreciated :)
>> The main issue PAXWEB-771 still needs to collect the items to do.
>> But right now neither Harald or I do have a lot of free cycles for it :(
>> It might be better to move this discussion to the ops4j mailinglist,
>>that's
>> why I cross posted this answer.
>>
>> regards, Achim
>> [1] - https://ops4j1.jira.com/projects/PAXWEB/issues
>>
>> 2015-04-14 15:41 GMT+02:00 Nick Baker <nb...@pentaho.com>:
>>
>>> We (Pentaho) can help with this. We¹d like to transition off Tomcat
>>> clusters to Karaf instances. One of the issues with this migration
>>>we¹ve
>>> identified is Jetty performance. Our next release will go out Tomcat
>>>with
>>> Karaf embedded, Felix HTTP Bridge spanning the two. Not where we want
>>>to
>>> be! What¹s the timeframe for the merge? Do you have a backlog of issues
>>> related to this? Let us know how we can help.
>>>
>>> -Nick Baker
>>>
>>> On 4/14/15, 7:31 AM, "Achim Nierbeck" <bc...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> nope it's actually Pax-Web 5.0 M1 and M2 (from the pax-web-undertow
>>>> branch)
>>>> which uses undertow only. And it's none of the fabric8 developers it's
>>>> Harald Wellmann, who also takes care of the Pax Exam.
>>>>
>>>> Right now I'm trying to find a way of having undertow as the third
>>>> supported container for pax web, to merge the pax-web-undertow
>>>> branch into the Pax-Web main branch for a 5.0
>>>> Help appreciated by the way ;)
>>>>
>>>> regards, Achim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2015-04-14 13:28 GMT+02:00 Nick Baker <nb...@pentaho.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> I could have swore one of the fabric8 developers was working on a
>>>>> pax-web-wildfly which is undertow-based. Not finding it via search.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Nick
>>>>> Original Message
>>>>> From: Rob Walker
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 5:44 AM
>>>>> To: users@felix.apache.org
>>>>> Reply To: users@felix.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: Jetty vs Undertow
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Interesting. Jetty is quite a long way down that graph compared to
>>>>> those.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know Richard (founder of Oscar which became Felix) was always
>>>>> interested in light/fast HttpService implementations. Could be an
>>>>> interesting little side project.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wiring Jetty into the very original OSGi HttpService interface didn't
>>>>> actually take that much work, although I haven't been back to the
>>>>>spec
>>>>> of late to see what's changed or been added that might make things
>>>>> harder
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Rob
>>>>>
>>>>> On 14/04/2015 11:27, Frank Langel wrote:
>>>>>> When using Felix http module in performance critical applications,
>>>>> Jetty
>>>>>> seems to underperform compared to modern servlet libraries such as
>>>>> undertow
>>>>>> or netty:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r9&hw=peak&test=jso
>>>n
>>>>>> Has/Is anyone working on a plug-in replacement for Undertow/Netty.
>>>>>>Any
>>>>>> experience/performance measurements? Any plans?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks a lot in advance
>>>>>> Frank
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ascert - Taking systems to the edge
>>>>> robw@ascert.com
>>>>> SA +27 21 300 2028
>>>>> UK +44 20 7488 3470 ext 5119
>>>>> www.ascert.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Apache Member
>>>> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
>>>> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/>
>>>>Committer &
>>>> Project Lead
>>>> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
>>>> Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS>
>>>>
>>>> Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>--
>
>
>Ascert - Taking systems to the edge
>robw@ascert.com
>SA +27 21 300 2028
>UK +44 20 7488 3470 ext 5119
>www.ascert.com
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
Re: Jetty vs Undertow
Posted by Rob Walker <ro...@ascert.com>.
Done a bit of background reading and both netty and undertow sound
interesting - they both score pretty high on the performance graph
linked to in the OP.
Any particular reason to go undertow vs netty. Seems netty started in
JBOSS but then move solo when they wanted a more to-the-metal approach
which became undertow. Netty seems a bit more feature rich at this
stage, which could perhaps be useful/interesting.
Of course the beauty of OSGi and projects like Felix etc is that there's
no reason not to have multiple HttpService implementations, assuming
there are enough contributors.
FWIW - our Felix project is on a very old cut of the Jetty based service
and I have a background action to move to a newer one. I'm not sure I'll
have time to help in implementing a netty/undertow based implementation
(although I haven't ruled that out) - but could be a guinea pig in
helping test it out in a real OSGi based App.
-- Rob
On 14/04/2015 15:47, Achim Nierbeck wrote:
> Hi Nick,
>
> Right now the "backlog" is a bit thin [1], but help is certainly
> appreciated :)
> The main issue PAXWEB-771 still needs to collect the items to do.
> But right now neither Harald or I do have a lot of free cycles for it :(
> It might be better to move this discussion to the ops4j mailinglist, that's
> why I cross posted this answer.
>
> regards, Achim
> [1] - https://ops4j1.jira.com/projects/PAXWEB/issues
>
> 2015-04-14 15:41 GMT+02:00 Nick Baker <nb...@pentaho.com>:
>
>> We (Pentaho) can help with this. We¹d like to transition off Tomcat
>> clusters to Karaf instances. One of the issues with this migration we¹ve
>> identified is Jetty performance. Our next release will go out Tomcat with
>> Karaf embedded, Felix HTTP Bridge spanning the two. Not where we want to
>> be! What¹s the timeframe for the merge? Do you have a backlog of issues
>> related to this? Let us know how we can help.
>>
>> -Nick Baker
>>
>> On 4/14/15, 7:31 AM, "Achim Nierbeck" <bc...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> nope it's actually Pax-Web 5.0 M1 and M2 (from the pax-web-undertow
>>> branch)
>>> which uses undertow only. And it's none of the fabric8 developers it's
>>> Harald Wellmann, who also takes care of the Pax Exam.
>>>
>>> Right now I'm trying to find a way of having undertow as the third
>>> supported container for pax web, to merge the pax-web-undertow
>>> branch into the Pax-Web main branch for a 5.0
>>> Help appreciated by the way ;)
>>>
>>> regards, Achim
>>>
>>>
>>> 2015-04-14 13:28 GMT+02:00 Nick Baker <nb...@pentaho.com>:
>>>
>>>> I could have swore one of the fabric8 developers was working on a
>>>> pax-web-wildfly which is undertow-based. Not finding it via search.
>>>>
>>>> -Nick
>>>> Original Message
>>>> From: Rob Walker
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 5:44 AM
>>>> To: users@felix.apache.org
>>>> Reply To: users@felix.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: Jetty vs Undertow
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Interesting. Jetty is quite a long way down that graph compared to
>>>> those.
>>>>
>>>> I know Richard (founder of Oscar which became Felix) was always
>>>> interested in light/fast HttpService implementations. Could be an
>>>> interesting little side project.
>>>>
>>>> Wiring Jetty into the very original OSGi HttpService interface didn't
>>>> actually take that much work, although I haven't been back to the spec
>>>> of late to see what's changed or been added that might make things
>>>> harder
>>>>
>>>> -- Rob
>>>>
>>>> On 14/04/2015 11:27, Frank Langel wrote:
>>>>> When using Felix http module in performance critical applications,
>>>> Jetty
>>>>> seems to underperform compared to modern servlet libraries such as
>>>> undertow
>>>>> or netty:
>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r9&hw=peak&test=json
>>>>> Has/Is anyone working on a plug-in replacement for Undertow/Netty. Any
>>>>> experience/performance measurements? Any plans?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks a lot in advance
>>>>> Frank
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ascert - Taking systems to the edge
>>>> robw@ascert.com
>>>> SA +27 21 300 2028
>>>> UK +44 20 7488 3470 ext 5119
>>>> www.ascert.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Apache Member
>>> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
>>> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer &
>>> Project Lead
>>> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
>>> Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS>
>>>
>>> Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>>
>>
>
--
Ascert - Taking systems to the edge
robw@ascert.com
SA +27 21 300 2028
UK +44 20 7488 3470 ext 5119
www.ascert.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
Re: Jetty vs Undertow
Posted by Achim Nierbeck <bc...@googlemail.com>.
Hi Nick,
Right now the "backlog" is a bit thin [1], but help is certainly
appreciated :)
The main issue PAXWEB-771 still needs to collect the items to do.
But right now neither Harald or I do have a lot of free cycles for it :(
It might be better to move this discussion to the ops4j mailinglist, that's
why I cross posted this answer.
regards, Achim
[1] - https://ops4j1.jira.com/projects/PAXWEB/issues
2015-04-14 15:41 GMT+02:00 Nick Baker <nb...@pentaho.com>:
> We (Pentaho) can help with this. We¹d like to transition off Tomcat
> clusters to Karaf instances. One of the issues with this migration we¹ve
> identified is Jetty performance. Our next release will go out Tomcat with
> Karaf embedded, Felix HTTP Bridge spanning the two. Not where we want to
> be! What¹s the timeframe for the merge? Do you have a backlog of issues
> related to this? Let us know how we can help.
>
> -Nick Baker
>
> On 4/14/15, 7:31 AM, "Achim Nierbeck" <bc...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >nope it's actually Pax-Web 5.0 M1 and M2 (from the pax-web-undertow
> >branch)
> >which uses undertow only. And it's none of the fabric8 developers it's
> >Harald Wellmann, who also takes care of the Pax Exam.
> >
> >Right now I'm trying to find a way of having undertow as the third
> >supported container for pax web, to merge the pax-web-undertow
> >branch into the Pax-Web main branch for a 5.0
> >Help appreciated by the way ;)
> >
> >regards, Achim
> >
> >
> >2015-04-14 13:28 GMT+02:00 Nick Baker <nb...@pentaho.com>:
> >
> >> I could have swore one of the fabric8 developers was working on a
> >> pax-web-wildfly which is undertow-based. Not finding it via search.
> >>
> >> -Nick
> >> Original Message
> >> From: Rob Walker
> >> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 5:44 AM
> >> To: users@felix.apache.org
> >> Reply To: users@felix.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: Jetty vs Undertow
> >>
> >>
> >> Interesting. Jetty is quite a long way down that graph compared to
> >>those.
> >>
> >> I know Richard (founder of Oscar which became Felix) was always
> >> interested in light/fast HttpService implementations. Could be an
> >> interesting little side project.
> >>
> >> Wiring Jetty into the very original OSGi HttpService interface didn't
> >> actually take that much work, although I haven't been back to the spec
> >> of late to see what's changed or been added that might make things
> >>harder
> >>
> >> -- Rob
> >>
> >> On 14/04/2015 11:27, Frank Langel wrote:
> >> > When using Felix http module in performance critical applications,
> >>Jetty
> >> > seems to underperform compared to modern servlet libraries such as
> >> undertow
> >> > or netty:
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r9&hw=peak&test=json
> >> >
> >> > Has/Is anyone working on a plug-in replacement for Undertow/Netty. Any
> >> > experience/performance measurements? Any plans?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks a lot in advance
> >> > Frank
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >>
> >> Ascert - Taking systems to the edge
> >> robw@ascert.com
> >> SA +27 21 300 2028
> >> UK +44 20 7488 3470 ext 5119
> >> www.ascert.com
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >--
> >
> >Apache Member
> >Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
> >OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer &
> >Project Lead
> >blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
> >Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS>
> >
> >Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>
>
--
Apache Member
Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer &
Project Lead
blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS>
Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master
Re: Jetty vs Undertow
Posted by Nick Baker <nb...@pentaho.com>.
We (Pentaho) can help with this. We¹d like to transition off Tomcat
clusters to Karaf instances. One of the issues with this migration we¹ve
identified is Jetty performance. Our next release will go out Tomcat with
Karaf embedded, Felix HTTP Bridge spanning the two. Not where we want to
be! What¹s the timeframe for the merge? Do you have a backlog of issues
related to this? Let us know how we can help.
-Nick Baker
On 4/14/15, 7:31 AM, "Achim Nierbeck" <bc...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>nope it's actually Pax-Web 5.0 M1 and M2 (from the pax-web-undertow
>branch)
>which uses undertow only. And it's none of the fabric8 developers it's
>Harald Wellmann, who also takes care of the Pax Exam.
>
>Right now I'm trying to find a way of having undertow as the third
>supported container for pax web, to merge the pax-web-undertow
>branch into the Pax-Web main branch for a 5.0
>Help appreciated by the way ;)
>
>regards, Achim
>
>
>2015-04-14 13:28 GMT+02:00 Nick Baker <nb...@pentaho.com>:
>
>> I could have swore one of the fabric8 developers was working on a
>> pax-web-wildfly which is undertow-based. Not finding it via search.
>>
>> -Nick
>> Original Message
>> From: Rob Walker
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 5:44 AM
>> To: users@felix.apache.org
>> Reply To: users@felix.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Jetty vs Undertow
>>
>>
>> Interesting. Jetty is quite a long way down that graph compared to
>>those.
>>
>> I know Richard (founder of Oscar which became Felix) was always
>> interested in light/fast HttpService implementations. Could be an
>> interesting little side project.
>>
>> Wiring Jetty into the very original OSGi HttpService interface didn't
>> actually take that much work, although I haven't been back to the spec
>> of late to see what's changed or been added that might make things
>>harder
>>
>> -- Rob
>>
>> On 14/04/2015 11:27, Frank Langel wrote:
>> > When using Felix http module in performance critical applications,
>>Jetty
>> > seems to underperform compared to modern servlet libraries such as
>> undertow
>> > or netty:
>> >
>>
>>https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r9&hw=peak&test=json
>> >
>> > Has/Is anyone working on a plug-in replacement for Undertow/Netty. Any
>> > experience/performance measurements? Any plans?
>> >
>> > Thanks a lot in advance
>> > Frank
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> Ascert - Taking systems to the edge
>> robw@ascert.com
>> SA +27 21 300 2028
>> UK +44 20 7488 3470 ext 5119
>> www.ascert.com
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>
>Apache Member
>Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
>OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer &
>Project Lead
>blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
>Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS>
>
>Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
Re: Jetty vs Undertow
Posted by Achim Nierbeck <bc...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
nope it's actually Pax-Web 5.0 M1 and M2 (from the pax-web-undertow branch)
which uses undertow only. And it's none of the fabric8 developers it's
Harald Wellmann, who also takes care of the Pax Exam.
Right now I'm trying to find a way of having undertow as the third
supported container for pax web, to merge the pax-web-undertow
branch into the Pax-Web main branch for a 5.0
Help appreciated by the way ;)
regards, Achim
2015-04-14 13:28 GMT+02:00 Nick Baker <nb...@pentaho.com>:
> I could have swore one of the fabric8 developers was working on a
> pax-web-wildfly which is undertow-based. Not finding it via search.
>
> -Nick
> Original Message
> From: Rob Walker
> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 5:44 AM
> To: users@felix.apache.org
> Reply To: users@felix.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Jetty vs Undertow
>
>
> Interesting. Jetty is quite a long way down that graph compared to those.
>
> I know Richard (founder of Oscar which became Felix) was always
> interested in light/fast HttpService implementations. Could be an
> interesting little side project.
>
> Wiring Jetty into the very original OSGi HttpService interface didn't
> actually take that much work, although I haven't been back to the spec
> of late to see what's changed or been added that might make things harder
>
> -- Rob
>
> On 14/04/2015 11:27, Frank Langel wrote:
> > When using Felix http module in performance critical applications, Jetty
> > seems to underperform compared to modern servlet libraries such as
> undertow
> > or netty:
> >
> https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r9&hw=peak&test=json
> >
> > Has/Is anyone working on a plug-in replacement for Undertow/Netty. Any
> > experience/performance measurements? Any plans?
> >
> > Thanks a lot in advance
> > Frank
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
>
>
> Ascert - Taking systems to the edge
> robw@ascert.com
> SA +27 21 300 2028
> UK +44 20 7488 3470 ext 5119
> www.ascert.com
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>
>
--
Apache Member
Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer &
Project Lead
blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS>
Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master
Re: Jetty vs Undertow
Posted by Nick Baker <nb...@pentaho.com>.
I could have swore one of the fabric8 developers was working on a pax-web-wildfly which is undertow-based. Not finding it via search.
-Nick
Original Message
From: Rob Walker
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 5:44 AM
To: users@felix.apache.org
Reply To: users@felix.apache.org
Subject: Re: Jetty vs Undertow
Interesting. Jetty is quite a long way down that graph compared to those.
I know Richard (founder of Oscar which became Felix) was always
interested in light/fast HttpService implementations. Could be an
interesting little side project.
Wiring Jetty into the very original OSGi HttpService interface didn't
actually take that much work, although I haven't been back to the spec
of late to see what's changed or been added that might make things harder
-- Rob
On 14/04/2015 11:27, Frank Langel wrote:
> When using Felix http module in performance critical applications, Jetty
> seems to underperform compared to modern servlet libraries such as undertow
> or netty:
> https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r9&hw=peak&test=json
>
> Has/Is anyone working on a plug-in replacement for Undertow/Netty. Any
> experience/performance measurements? Any plans?
>
> Thanks a lot in advance
> Frank
>
>
>
--
Ascert - Taking systems to the edge
robw@ascert.com
SA +27 21 300 2028
UK +44 20 7488 3470 ext 5119
www.ascert.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
Re: Jetty vs Undertow
Posted by Rob Walker <ro...@ascert.com>.
Interesting. Jetty is quite a long way down that graph compared to those.
I know Richard (founder of Oscar which became Felix) was always
interested in light/fast HttpService implementations. Could be an
interesting little side project.
Wiring Jetty into the very original OSGi HttpService interface didn't
actually take that much work, although I haven't been back to the spec
of late to see what's changed or been added that might make things harder
-- Rob
On 14/04/2015 11:27, Frank Langel wrote:
> When using Felix http module in performance critical applications, Jetty
> seems to underperform compared to modern servlet libraries such as undertow
> or netty:
> https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r9&hw=peak&test=json
>
> Has/Is anyone working on a plug-in replacement for Undertow/Netty. Any
> experience/performance measurements? Any plans?
>
> Thanks a lot in advance
> Frank
>
>
>
--
Ascert - Taking systems to the edge
robw@ascert.com
SA +27 21 300 2028
UK +44 20 7488 3470 ext 5119
www.ascert.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org