[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
Do your tests use JBoss microcontainer in all cases? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4111022#4111022 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4111022 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
There is also somewhat older article from JBoss about Seam performance, might be interesting as reference information: http://www.dell.com/downloads/global/power/jbossworld_2006_june_jaffe.pdf View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4111025#4111025 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4111025 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
Never in fact. Why ? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4111026#4111026 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4111026 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
I wouldn't be surprised if you don't get very high performance using microcontainer because you're not using full JEE capabilities of application server. But since you didn't use MC I can't comment on your numbers (I am not a performance tuning expert). Was the JSF (without Seam) application a 'full' equivalent of a Seam application? I don't have hard numbers but in my case I had performance improved (didn't need to measure to see improvement) a lot mostly due to moving lot's of stuff from request (session scope was not acceptable) scope (JSF application) to conversation scope which reduced amount of database trips a lot. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4111031#4111031 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4111031 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
"svadu" wrote : I wouldn't be surprised if you don't get very high performance using microcontainer because you're not using full JEE capabilities of application server. I really don't see how MC would explain performance gain between plain jsf and seam. But I've never used MC. Could you explain MC benefits for my use case ? "svadu" wrote : Was the JSF (without Seam) application a 'full' equivalent of a Seam application? Yes, I've just removed Seam from the spring sample which is included in Seam 2.0.0 GA distribution. "svadu" wrote : I don't have hard numbers but in my case I had performance improved (didn't need to measure to see improvement) a lot mostly due to moving lot's of stuff from request (session scope was not acceptable) scope (JSF application) to conversation scope which reduced amount of database trips a lot. I fully agree that it would increase my performance if I was using session replication in db. But since I'm not using session replication and I don't have session size problems, i don't see the benefits. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4111033#4111033 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4111033 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
"gonzalad" wrote : "svadu" wrote : I wouldn't be surprised if you don't get very high performance using microcontainer because you're not using full JEE capabilities of application server. | I really don't see how MC would explain performance gain between plain jsf and seam. But I've never used MC. Could you explain MC benefits for my use case ? I didn't mean that MC would give you performance benefits :) I think if you prepare more details (as you mentioned in the original post) it's likely Seam team will be interested in your case... View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4111036#4111036 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4111036 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
I'll send more info on Monday then. Have a good week end and thanks for your help ! View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4111038#4111038 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4111038 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
"svadu" wrote : There is also somewhat older article from JBoss about Seam performance, might be interesting as reference information: http://www.dell.com/downloads/global/power/jbossworld_2006_june_jaffe.pdf Thanks for this review, I've already looked at it, but read it once more (in case of..). But doesn't help ;(( page 24 short think time : in fact all vusers involved in all tests had no think time. logging : no log in any my tests (only at startup). client vs server state : server state always used (session size was 180 ko ouch ! for all tests). no ejb : so no call by value problem vusers where between 5 and 15. no load balancing no session replication and no .css or .js or image requested from my vusers ! View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4111032#4111032 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4111032 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
So Monday
Hello !
Here is some more information about the load tests we executed.
If you want more information please tell me. Also, if you have an idea on how
we can achieve betters results, I'm interested (of course !).
Otherwise I think you can find some interesting comparative and instructive (ar
least for me !) performance results.
Please note, I'm really far from being a bench expert or a system expert - I'm
only a humble little developper so once more please - if anyone sees some
interesting optimization to apply just tell me !
Also, those tests were made on a simple application and are not representative
for application in production environment
(we didnt' have time to code one for each framework :)).
Extract
>From our test:
. Seam consumes 3 times (really average) more cpu than the same app with plain
jsf.
. JSF consumes 3 times (really average) more than plain old Struts like app.
I would have really expected at the beginning a performance ratio of 2 times
more for Seam app that Struts like but it's like 10 !
arrrggh !
I - Test Environment
1. Injector platform used :
Pentium IV 3 GHz, 2 Go RAM.
Windows XP Professional SP1 with JMeter 2.3.
2. App Server
Websphere 6.1.0.13
IBM JRE 5.0 SR6 64bits
(Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build
pap64devifx-20071025 (SR6b)).
sxqwas02 : 6 Processors 2.1 GHz Power PC5
40894464 Ko
One JVM
No clustering and no session replication.
JVM Parameters
Initial Heap Size = 256 Mo
Max Heap Size = 512 Mo
Web Container Threads =
Session Timeout = 4 minutes
JDBC Pool = {connectionTimeout=60s, maxConnections=10, minConnections=5,
reapTime=60, unusedTimeout=120, aged=0}
Threadpool : minSize = 5,maxSize = 20
3. Web Server
IBM HTTP Server 6.1.0.5
CPU : 1 proc 2812.972 MHz
Dual-Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 8220 SE
RAM : 1025372 Ko
IHS Parameters
Timeout 300
KeepAlive On
MaxKeepAliveRequests 100
KeepAliveTimeout 15
StartServers 5
MaxClients 150
MinSpareThreads 5
MaxSpareThreads 10
ThreadsPerChild 25
MaxRequestsPerChild 1
II - Test scenario
1. Scenario
User uses jpa sample application bundled with Seam.
All vusers execute the following scenario in loop :
1. go to page /jpa/home.seam
2. loggin
user=demo
pass=demo
3. user press the 'Find Hotel' button
(no search criteria and max results=10).
4. user selects first record in the list
5. user books this hotel
6. user enters booking information
7. user confirms his reservation
8. user cancels his reservation.
2. mesurement points
All version of the application were tested with 15tx/s, 30tx/s, 60tx/s,
120tx/s, 240tx/s.
3. Ramp up period/think time, vuser count, etc...
No think time.
No Ramp up period (we used a constant throughput timer in JMeter to limit the
number of request to 15, 30, ...tx/s) depending on the scenario.
4. Applications tested
a. jpa sample modified to remove a4j and RichFaces components & libraries.
uses SUN RI 1.2 (bundled with Seam), facelets, Seam 2.0.0.GA
name:jpa-no-a4j.ear
same as jpa from Seam except rich*.jar removed, el-impl.jar added (if
it wasn't already there).
b. jpa sample modified to remove Seam, include Spring for business Layer.
uses SUN RI 1.2, facelets, Spring (bundled with Seam 2.0.0.GA)
name:jpa-standard-jsf-facelets.ear
c. jpa sample modified to remove Seam and facelets, include Spring for business
Layer.
uses SUN RI 1.2, JSP, Spring (bundled with Seam 2.0.0.GA)
name:jpa-standard-jsf-sun-1.2.ear
d. jpa sample modified to remove Seam and facelets, include Spring for business
Layer.
uses IBM JSF (1.1), JSP, Spring (bundled with Seam 2.0.0.GA)
name:jpa-standard-jsf.ear
e. another demo application which runs with a Struts like framework.
name:demo.ear
5. Notes
Please, note that when we removed Seam, we put hotel list in request scope, not
in session scope.
Note also log level was at WARN (so no logs after startup during test
execution).
III Results
Result data was retrieved from :
a. JMeter Summary Report (tx/s, page size).
b. topas (cpu usage).
c. Wily Introscope (hea size, session size)
1. Test with 15tx/s
Scenario tx/s CPU used(%) el time moy (ms)page
size (ko) session size (ko) bytes used in heap (Mo)
| jpa-no-a4j.ear 15 10 87
5,8 181,4
244,3
| jpa-standard-jsf-facelets.ear
| 15 449
6,2 81,1 NA
| jpa-standard-jsf.ear
| 15 4 47
6,2 2,0220
| jpa-standard-jsf-sun-1.2.ear
| 15 4,5
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
These are surprising results for me as well. I will review them and compare with our own servers. I will be adding more tests and comparisons in regards to performance to the Seam project as time goes on. I appreciate your work on this. Thanks, -Jay JBoss Seam QE. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4111749#4111749 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4111749 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
Thank you very much for your concern Jay, I'm looking forward for any news you might have on this subject - whatever it would be (configuration change, code change or just different results than me). I'll also be very interested about your performance results between plain jsf and seam if you make such tests. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4111849#4111849 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4111849 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
The debug mode for Seam would have a significant impact on your stats. Have you set the debug mode for Seam to false? In components.xml, try adding: View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4111870#4111870 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4111870 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
Hi lowecg2004, Thanks for the tip. Just modified the jpa-no-a4j.ear application adding : anonymous wrote : But same results than before (looking at Seam code, debug="false" is the default value). So, for a constant throughput of 60tx/s, I have the following results : cpu used=40% elapsed(ms)=94ms for a 5 minute long load-test. Thanks you once more anyway ! View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4111947#4111947 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4111947 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote : These are surprising results for me as well. I will review them and compare with our own servers. | | I will be adding more tests and comparisons in regards to performance to the Seam project as time goes on. I appreciate your work on this. | Hi Jay, It would be nice if after sorting this out an official article about Seam performance was posted. The old article listed at the beginning of this thread is... somewhat old. And there is much need in more fresh and official info on Seam performance for it to be taken more seriously by enterprises. Thanks again, I am really glad Red Hat/JBoss team has picked this issue that quickly! View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4112390#4112390 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4112390 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
Hi, Do You have any news on this performance issue? We are currently using Seam 1.2 and have enough performance issues as it is, so an upgrade to Seam 2.0 is out of the question until we can be sure that the performance is significantly better than in version 1.2. Thanks! View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4120760#4120760 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4120760 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
Unfortunately no - I have been working on interoperability with OC4J, Weblogic, and websphere. We will be reviewing priorities and planned tests in the next several weeks. I will carry on your concern. Rest assured that performance baselines and benchmarks are among the top of the priorities. Thanks, Jay View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4120894#4120894 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4120894 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
I think it would be good to get the information below into jira issue. If you could check the jira search below to see if there is another issue that is similar before creating a new one that would be great. If there is not another issue that is similar please add a new one. http://jira.jboss.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&&query=performance&summary=true&description=true&pid=10071&status=1&status=3&status=4 Thanks alot, Jay View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4121433#4121433 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4121433 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
Would it make sense to create a jira issue for this? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4121427#4121427 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4121427 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
