Re: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance [more results]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Chuck, On 5/25/2009 1:30 PM, Caldarale, Charles R wrote: >> From: Caldarale, Charles R >> Subject: RE: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance [more >> results] > > There are some extracts from the 2007 O'Reilly Tomcat book about > benchmarking on somewhat newer hardware than Chris is using: > http://www.devshed.com/c/b/BrainDump/ > > The interesting articles are dated 02-12-09 through 03-05-09 (silly > American date format), with actual results in the second page of the > 02-26-09 article: > http://www.devshed.com/c/a/BrainDump/Tomcat-Benchmark-Procedure/1/ Interestingly enough, their results suggest that the "Tomcat HTTP JIO" connector (presumably the basic Coyote connector without APR) performs the best. The workload (50k requests) relative to the type of machine used (64-bit, presumably fast CPUs) seems like too little work to get a good sample. Note that they use requests-per-second as their metric and not transfer rate, but those numbers are so closely related as to be synonymous for comparison purposes. I will have to start testing prefork httpd (my current configuration) against worker httpd to see how they compare. - -chris -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkodYCEACgkQ9CaO5/Lv0PDWpQCfWunji/z1ZbxxX5fAklWm1rsh /6gAn3P42e4TFPtIIgVyUz1uP8vGTOmZ =yMwV -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance [more results]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 All, The message below was garbled when sent. Fortunately, it ended up being preserved correctly in my sent message folder. Here it is. - -chris - Original Message Subject: Re: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance [more results] Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 11:16:35 -0400 From: Christopher Schultz To: Tomcat Users List All, I have some more results to share. The other day, I ran my battery of tests using a concurrency of 40. The NIO connector failed (see thread "NIO Connector: Too many open files?") so I re-ran the tests last night for the 2 NIO connector configurations using the connectors for the upcoming 6.0.20 release (thanks Filip!). The setup is the same as last time with no changes except the upgrade to the NIO Connector and a concurrency of 40 instead of 1. Here's the data (again, apologies for the formatting: tabs are embedded and should copy-and-paste correctly into your favorite spreadsheet): File Size Apache httpdCoyote Coyote APR Coyote APR-sendfile Coyote NIO Coyote NIO-sendfile 4kiB6307.55 7628.87 8230.45 9096.91 4969.78 4996.87 8kiB11907.0113625.7515015.2216216.138345.98 8331.45 16kiB 21511.0620572.4122564.7522429.26 13932.0414051.91 32kiB 36900.0832013.6135283.0435281.78 23175.3723213.86 64kiB 59987.8445656.4167222.5246795.15 42869.3734439.83 128kiB 89253.6457845.10111764.82 59878.29 72429.7741162.18 256kiB 158988.25 68256.39170342.89 71287.26 113206.39 43948.25 512kiB 199224.21 59159.82193991.50 61591.43 143681.05 39052.58 1MiB228606.84 62219.68223536.86 65593.84 181073.70 40105.58 2MiB204427.20 63819.99241936.12 67755.48 193955.60 40158.96 4MiB251554.92 65018.41254518.59 68927.04 219885.29 41273.23 8MiB252739.39 65325.90260633.21 69351.87 230627.76 41579.37 16MiB 250098.08 65486.70265946.32 69088.37 234902.65 41355.81 32MiB 262562.01 65041.41268329.63 68747.39 242388.97 41055.28 Apache httpd and the APR+sendfile connector still appear to be giving similar results, which still makes sense given that the same code is really running in both cases. The NIO+sendfile connector politely didn't intrude on the contest between httpd and APR+sendfile, coming-in a close second. I'm interested to see what happens when I really start cranking-up the concurrency, since the NIO connector is really supposed to shine in that scenario. The other connector configurations remain poor performers for files larger than 32k. That last observation is interesting to me: it suggests that if you are running Tomcat as a static file server for small web app assets such as icons, CSS files, etc. then it really doesn't matter what connector you use: performance is comparable to using any of the other strategies. - -chris -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkobHucACgkQ9CaO5/Lv0PDTgwCfZZdYHSJZ3vpaokHvDYmdB5vK 0vIAn2cHLp998j22SXzUZ2/CVwJenRPU =CsLL -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
RE: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance [more results]
> From: Caldarale, Charles R > Subject: RE: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance [more > results] There are some extracts from the 2007 O'Reilly Tomcat book about benchmarking on somewhat newer hardware than Chris is using: http://www.devshed.com/c/b/BrainDump/ The interesting articles are dated 02-12-09 through 03-05-09 (silly American date format), with actual results in the second page of the 02-26-09 article: http://www.devshed.com/c/a/BrainDump/Tomcat-Benchmark-Procedure/1/ - Chuck THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its attachments from all computers. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
RE: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance [more results]
> From: André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com] > Subject: Re: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance [more > results] > > Chris, there's something wrong with this post. You have to use lemon juice and a heat source to read it... - Chuck THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its attachments from all computers. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance [more results]
Christopher Schultz wrote: Chris, there's something wrong with this post. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance [more results]
binfqTJI0hlYT.bin Description: PGP/MIME version identification
