Its encouraging that you are finding it fast now though!
Kalnichevski, Oleg wrote:
I am not aware of HttpClient being specifically optimized for performance. May other developers correct me if I err, rather, I believe, HttpClient is being developed primarily with standards compliance in mind. However, I am by no means entitled to speak on behalf of all HttpClient developers, so take it as my personal opinion
Most probable explanation to such significant difference in performance numbers is the fact that HttpClient does a pretty decent job reusing active connections (thanks to Mike Becke). I doubt Sun's HttpURLConnection supports any sort of connection pooling at all.
Oleg
-----Original Message-----
From: Derk Muenchhausen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 13:40
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: performance
Hi,
I just compared the performance of Sun's HttpURLConnection with Apache's HttpClient. I tried several times a chunked communication with four 8192 byte chunks.
HttpURLConnection needs about 890 ms, HttpClient needs just 722 ms.
Was my measuring wrong? Is HttpClient really faster than HttpURLConnection? What have you done, that HttpClient got significant faster?
Derk
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
