You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@tomcat.apache.org by Tim Kientzle <ki...@acm.org> on 2000/07/19 20:22:22 UTC
Re: Tomcat benchmarks from orionserver.com, Please comment. Important
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
> >
> >
> >
Re: Tomcat benchmarks from orionserver.com, Please comment. Important
Posted by James Cook <ji...@iname.com>.
This is not meant as a slam against the very capable developers of Tomcat.
It really is a testament to these other opensource projects (resin
inparticular), that a single developer or two can produce such capable
products in such accelerated timeframes. Resin is mainly developed by one or
two persons, and didn't have the advantage(?) of an existing codebase. They
pumped out a very respectable servlet 2.2 compliant server months ago.
jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Kientzle" <ki...@acm.org>
To: <to...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 2:22 PM
Subject: Re: Tomcat benchmarks from orionserver.com, Please comment.
Important
> 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
> > >
> > >
> > >