Thruput, response, and perf servlets>Remy, I should have said "throughput,
as in number of requests
>processed per second". My point is that if some servlet S requires TC
>to use more disk+cpu than the HelloWorldExample on a particular
>machine, then TC's processing rate for S will be lower than it is for
>the HelloWorldExample.
It does way more than nothing, as Costin (I think) pointed out :
ResourceBundle rb =
ResourceBundle.getBundle("LocalStrings",request.getLocale());
response.setContentType("text/html");
So there's disk access (which is very bad).
For maximum number of requests / s, I need a servlet whose service function
is empty.
>Yes, but the response time for processing HelloWorldExample servlets
>should be less than the avg response time for processing a servlet S
>which "does more" than HelloWorldExample.
With the IO caused by the resource bundle loading, I'm not sure.
>I think we agree, but stated things differently. Or, maybe not :).
We do, but the HelloWorldServlet does more than :
PrintWriter out = response.getWriter();
out.println("Hello");
>A kind of synthetic workload? There are commercial products that do
>that sort of thing, I think.
Great. It's not that I don't like commercial software, but I think we could
use a free test suite.
>So, I propose a workload model based on servlets we already have (or
>could develop for). Starements about TC performance are relative to a
>transportable set of requests and there is no need to get into wars
>about which version of TC is better. Too simple, I know. This is a bit
>like what you propose about a "perf" webapp maybe?
Np. I still want the maximum performance case, though ;) Real people will
probably not be interested by it, but developers who may want to help
optimizing Tomcat would find them helpful.
Could we do both so that everyone's happy ?
Remy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
