Hello,
I'm interested in estimating performance (and load) impacts of ACL
checking on read access. I'm specifically interested in a comparison where
paths like /a, /a/b, /a/b/c, /a/.../y/z are accessed, and ACL has to be
evaluated upwards on the path. Since such a test is more high-level and
may suffer from many side-effects, it's probably more of a load test than
a performance test.
Are there any test results available with respect to ACL, comparing
Jackrabbit with Oak?
Are there any load test results available comparing Jackrabbit with Oak?
Can you point me to the code of these benchmarks?
Cheers
Lukas
On 4/26/13 1:12 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
wrote:
Here's a few more simple benchmark results to show where we are:
Updated numbers with latest Oak:
# ReadPropertyTest min 10% 50% 90% max
N
Jackrabbit34 35 37 60 110
1333
Oak-Default8 9 9 20 76
4972
Oak-Mongo 10 10 11 34 38
4501
Oak-Segment 13 13 14 37 44
3482
# SmallFileReadTest min 10% 50% 90% max
N
Jackrabbit50 52 76 117 622
764
Oak-Default 51 53 77 390 496
483
Oak-Mongo159 160 184 517 657
259
Oak-Segment 15 16 17 40 86
2813
# SmallFileWriteTest min 10% 50% 90% max
N
Jackrabbit 181 200 250 4691088
105
Oak-Default 169 180 232 429 923
107
Oak-Mongo698 727 88610511066
26
Oak-Segment 221 247 262 337 651
77
Overall that's pretty nice progress. Apart from a few exceptions,
we're now better (sometimes significantly so) or on par with
Jackrabbit 2.x in these benchmarks.
BR,
Jukka Zitting