|
Sponsored Links
Resources
Enterprise Java
Research Library
Get Java white papers, product information, case studies and webcasts
|
News
News
News
|
Messages: 21
Messages: 21
Messages: 21
Printer friendly
Printer friendly
Printer friendly
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
XML
XML
XML
|
 |
Sun submits SPECjAppServer2004 score on free stack
Sun recently submitted a SPECjAppServer2004 submission based on a software stack that's entirely no-cost: Solaris 10, MySQL, and their platform edition app server.
The SPECjAppServer2004 application is an industry benchmark for testing Java Enterprise Edition applications. It's designed around an application that has features in five domains. From the design document: The five SPECjAppServer2004 domains modeled are : Dealer, Manufacturing, Supplier, Customer, and Corporate. The Dealer domain encompasses the user interface components of a Web-based application used to access the services provided by the other domains (i.e., Manufacturing, Supplier, Customer and Corporate), which can be considered "business domains." In a company of the size being modeled, it is assumed that each business domain, has separate databases and applications. Most likely, they are implemented on separate computing hardware also. There are producer-consumer relationships between domains in the company and to outside suppliers and customers as well. For historical reasons, each business domain may have distinct entity IDs (i.e., the customer ID used in the customer domain may be different from the ID used for that same customer in the Supplier domain). It is for this reason that global customer or supplier databases are likely to exist in the Corporate domain, with accompanying applications. With three server nodes and one database instance, it scored 266 JOPS (jAppServer Operations Per Second), calculated as Dealer Transactions/sec + Workorders/sec. (For reference, the SPECjAppServer2004 FAQ mentions the application being run on 1.6GHz laptop with a 30GB HD, with 512MB RAM, and while the DB isn't specified, it attained a score of 2.) While this is the lowest score reported, comparing the configuration to the other submitted scores and factoring in the costs of software licensing, this score is quite good.
Note, also, that the nature of the application tested is "large," and not the most popular application of Java, Enterprise Edition; most applications developed tend to be much lighter and therefore might generate far different transaction patterns and stress points. Another factor is that the SPECjAppServer2004 application is designed to work with J2EE 1.3, not J2EE 1.4 or JEE 5, so some of the solutions might be considered "archaic" by the current specifications.
It might be interesting to see if there is potential in creating a standard "typical" JEE application, to generate transaction comparisons for non-Fortune 500 applications.
|
|
|
Message #178720
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun submits SPECjAppServer2004 score on free stack
I'm good to see Sun doing this.
Am I the only one dying to know what the scores would be if the identical test was repeated, but Sun swapped out the Sun app server for Jboss, Geronimo and Caucho Resin? (Other open source servers.)
Peace,
Cameron Purdy
Tangosol Coherence: Clustered Shared Memory for Java
|
|
|
Message #178725
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun submits SPECjAppServer2004 score on free stack
I'm good to see Sun doing this.Am I the only one dying to know what the scores would be if the identical test was repeated, but Sun swapped out the Sun app server for Jboss, Geronimo and Caucho Resin? (Other open source servers.)
No, you're not.
|
|
|
Message #178731
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun submits SPECjAppServer2004 score on free stack
It's the x86 AMD based Sun here, but they still spend R&D money on Sparc. :-(
.V
|
|
|
Message #178735
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun submits SPECjAppServer2004 score on free stack
It's the x86 AMD based Sun here, but they still spend R&D money on Sparc. Sure - SPARC is their high end bread and butter. The AMD stuff is more for mass-market, as far as I can tell. Why would they not concentrate on their core competencies in R&D? The low-end machines don't seem to be merely a dalliance in bitty-boxen, mind you, and they are getting research dollars (see the new workstations, which are very nice indeed from what I've looked at) but...
|
|
|
Message #178738
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun submits SPECjAppServer2004 score on free stack
I'm good to see Sun doing this.Am I the only one dying to know what the scores would be if the identical test was repeated, but Sun swapped out the Sun app server for Jboss, Geronimo and Caucho Resin? (Other open source servers.) No, you're not.
Me Three.
I have been using the SunApp server with mixed results. In general I really like it, but on the other hand it sometimes craps out, and starts throwing stack traces that don't seem related to my code.
I'm also happy about the good integration with Netbeans. I think it will end up benefiting the community to have a well integrated IDE/App server for those who want it.
|
|
|
Message #178754
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun submits SPECjAppServer2004 score on free stack
It's the x86 AMD based Sun here, but they still spend R&D money on Sparc. :-(.V
Horses for courses. Products based on the different chip architectures are aimed at VERY different workloads and markets. Both being 64bit doesn't make them the same.
Rich Sharples
Sun Microsystems
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/sharps
|
|
|
Message #178755
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun submits SPECjAppServer2004 score on free stack
I'm good to see Sun doing this.Am I the only one dying to know what the scores would be if the identical test was repeated, but Sun swapped out the Sun app server for Jboss, Geronimo and Caucho Resin? (Other open source servers.)
Yes, that would be interesting wouldn't it. We actually do know what would happen because we've tried it but there's nothing to motivate us to publish anything; for one thing we'd be accused of rigging the numbers.
If you want to see JBoss or Geronimo numbers you're going to have to ask them.
One thing we do feel is in the public interest is the details of how we achieved the benchmark (ie. throughput and Java EE compatibity re. MySQL 5.0) - Tom Daly has already started blogging about this :
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/tomdaly
and we'll probably be producing a WebCast / Tech Article in the future.
Rich Sharples
Sun Microsystems
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/sharps
|
|
|
Message #178756
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sparc vs. Opteron bandwidth
Products based on the different chip architectures are aimed at VERY different workloads and markets. Both being 64bit doesn't make them the same.Rich Sharples
From the posted STREAM benchmark for a SunFire 25K with 12 cpus, it looks each cpu in this box has a memory bandwidth of about "900".
I believe a P4 will score about 1500 and an opteron about 2500.
I am guessing that this means that for OLTP applications opteron is better suited.
|
|
|
Message #178759
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sparc vs. Opteron bandwidth
>From the posted STREAM benchmark for a SunFire 25K with 12 cpus, it looks each cpu in this box has a memory bandwidth of about 900.I believe a P4 will score about 1500 and an opteron about 2500.
I agree with people that say that practice shows that much more expensive Sparc is much slower than Sun AMD boxes. Marketing says something else.
.V
http://roomity.com
|
|
|
Message #178770
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun submits SPECjAppServer2004 score on free stack
Yes, that would be interesting wouldn't it. We actually do know what would happen because we've tried it but there's nothing to motivate us to publish anything; for one thing we'd be accused of rigging the numbers.
If you want to see JBoss or Geronimo numbers you're going to have to ask them.
OK, be accused of rigging them. You're not the only one to have run these tests, but all you big app server vendors are afraid of getting dirt on your shoes. Just publish the numbers as a hardware vendor, like HPaq used to do.
Either way, you can sell more servers.
Peace,
Cameron Purdy
Tangosol Coherence: Clustered Shared Memory for Java
|
|
|
Message #178772
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun submits SPECjAppServer2004 score on free stack
OK, be accused of rigging them. You're not the only one to have run these tests, but all you big app server vendors are afraid of getting dirt on your shoes. Just publish the numbers as a hardware vendor, like HPaq used to do.Either way, you can sell more servers.Peace,Cameron PurdyTangosol Coherence: Clustered Shared Memory for Java
We're not above doing that and we have jointly submitted benchmarks with BEA in the past; for example.
You're assuming that the submissions would relect positively on our hardware; which raises an interesting question - I wonder why HP haven't submitted something on behalf of JBoss considering their relationship ?
Rich Sharples
Sun Microsystems
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/sharps
|
|
|
Message #178774
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun submits SPECjAppServer2004 score on free stack
Me Three.I have been using the SunApp server with mixed results. In general I really like it, but on the other hand it sometimes craps out, and starts throwing stack traces that don't seem related to my code. Matt, if you didn't have any luck via the forums :http://forum.java.sun.com/forum.jspa?forumID=136shoot me an email with some details (sharps at sun dot com) and I'll see if I can help.Rich SharplesSun Microsystemshttp://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/sharps
Thanks Rich,
I took a break from working with it last month, but I plan to pick it back up. Thanks for the link to the forum, for some reason I missed it last time I went looking for help.
Any word on when you guys will have a EJB3 beta version of platform edition out for us to try?
|
|
|
Message #178803
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun submits SPECjAppServer2004 score on free stack
Cameron :
I'm good to see Sun doing this.Am I the only one dying to know what the scores would be if the identical test was repeated, but Sun swapped out the Sun app server for Jboss, Geronimo and Caucho Resin? (Other open source servers.)
Was this an open source app server that they tested with? IIRC, Glassfish is their only OSS app server, and the spec for it isn't even ready yet. (J2EE 5)
What did I miss?
-geir
|
|
|
Message #178841
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Sun submits SPECjAppServer2004 score on free stack
Was this an open source app server that they tested with? IIRC, Glassfish is their only OSS app server, and the spec for it isn't even ready yet. (J2EE 5)What did I miss?-geir
The benchmark was done with Sun Java System Application Server
8 Platform Edition, which is a FREE application server.
Glassfish is Application server 9, so it shares lot of code with Application Server 8.
Peter
(Sun employee)
|
|
|
Message #178900
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
RE: Sparc vs. Opteron bandwidth
>From the posted STREAM benchmark for a SunFire 25K with 12 cpus, it looks each cpu in this box has a memory bandwidth of about 900.I believe a P4 will score about 1500 and an opteron about 2500. I agree with people that say that practice shows that much more expensive Sparc is much slower than Sun AMD boxes. Marketing says something else..Vhttp://roomity.com
There are other reasons to purchase the more expensive hardware than pure performance.
|
|
|
Message #179237
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
GPL or commercial MySQL JDBC drivers?
First, a few disclaimers
1) I work for MySQL AB
2) I helped out with the JDBC side of things on this benchmark
Okay, with that out of the way...Since Sun doesn't (and _can't_ in fact) redistribute this benchmark (because of the license SPEC places it under), there is no derived work made with the GPL MySQL drivers, and thus the terms of the GPL are not in force in this situation.
You might want to check out http://dev.mysql.com/tech-resources/articles/mysql-network-and-you.html where we (MySQL AB) explain our position on the GPL and how it affects various scenarios, especially given our new(ish) subscription offering, "MySQL Network".
-Mark
(developer of Connector/J, Development Manager for Connectivity Products -- MySQL AB)
|
|
|
Message #179238
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
GPL or commercial MySQL JDBC drivers?
First, a few disclaimers
1) I work for MySQL AB
2) I helped out with the JDBC side of things on this benchmark
Okay, with that out of the way...Since Sun doesn't (and _can't_ in fact) redistribute this benchmark (because of the license SPEC places it under), there is no derived work made with the GPL MySQL drivers that is _distributed_, and thus the terms of the GPL are not in force in this situation.
You might want to check out http://dev.mysql.com/tech-resources/articles/mysql-network-and-you.html where we (MySQL AB) explain our position on the GPL and how it affects various scenarios, especially given our new(ish) subscription offering, "MySQL Network".
-Mark
(developer of Connector/J, Development Manager for Connectivity Products -- MySQL AB)
|
|
|
| New content on TheServerSide.comNew content on TheServerSide.comNew content on TheServerSide.com |
|
|
Reza Rahman explores the features of the proposed JSR 299, Contexts and Dependency Injection for Java EE (CDI). When approved, it promises to be a key feature of Java EE 6.
(November 2, Article)
SAML is an XML-based standard for exchanging authentication and authorization data between security domains. The single most important problem that SAML was created to solve is the Web browser Single Sign-On problem. Many organizations are debating whether to stay with version 1.1 or move to 2.0. This article makes observations about both options.
(September 28, Article)
Joe Ottinger takes a look at how people learn, and applies it to the practice of programming. He notes that understanding how people learn is an essential part of working in a programming team.
(September 22, Article)
Stephen Maryka gave us an article about the Asynchronous Web and posed a number of questions that get examined like an approach to delivering Asynchronous Web capabilities through extensions to existing Java EE technologies.
(July 14, Article)
JavaServer Faces Flex goal is to provide users capability in creating standard Flex components, part of flexSDK which is open sourced through MPL license, as normal JSF components. This article by Ji Hoon Kim will provide an overview of creating a simple multilingual JSF page consisting of JSF Flex tags.
(June 29, Article)
In this session Jeff explores the key characteristics of successful SOA projects. He covers some of the patterns, and anti-patterns, tool sets, and strategies that he himself learned the hard way. Last, he provides a strategy and blueprint for achieving a high likelihood of success in your SOA project.
(June 23, Tech Talk)
Ari Zilka, CTO of Terracotta, Inc., talks about the new features in Terracotta 3.1, announced during JavaOne and available now.
(June 15, Tech Talk)
In this Tech Talk, Josh Long explores an integration challenge using Spring Integration and walks through the implementation, employing and expanding on the basic patterns of Enterprise Application Integration to tie together components into a function integration solution, and then demonstrates how Spring Integration helps address the integration requirements.
(June 15, Tech Talk)
In this Tech Talk, David Geary teaches you: The basics of Google Web Toolkit; How to implement Ajax-enabled applications in Java; Internationalization; Hooking into the browser history mechanism; Remote procedure calls.
(June 4, Tech Talk)
Jon Kern discusses the best architecture/technical solutions and ensure that they are repeated by all developers. By tackling the architecture up-front in a serial manner, subsequent parallel development will be much more manageable and predictable.
(May 28, Tech Talk)
This keynote describes the frustrations of modern knowledge workers in their quest to actually get some work done, and solutions for how to guard yourself against all those distractions. Neal Ford talks about environments, coding, acceleration, automation, and avoiding repetition as ways to defeat the misguided attempts to sap your ability to produce good work.
(May 26, Tech Talk)
Gil demonstrates how new, aggressive uses of already abundant compute capacity by common applications offer competitive value for application designers.
(May 21, Tech Talk)
Chris Keene introduces WaveMaker as a new way to automate the ability to generate Hibernate classes in order to more quickly bring OR mapping into an application.
(May 19, Article)
In this session Nati Shalom demonstrates how to take a standard Java EE web application and scale it out or down dynamically without changes to the application code. Seeing as most web applications are over-provisioned to meet infrequent peak loads, this is a dramatic change because it enables growing your application as needed, when needed, without paying for unutilized resources.
(May 19, Tech Talk)
Download the entire book of Jakarta-Struts Live and learn about Struts MVC, Tiles, the Validator, DynaActionForms, plug-ins, internationalization, and more.
(Book PDF Download)
The Application Server Matrix is a detailed listing of J2EE vendors and their application server products, with information on latest version numbers, J2EE spec support and licensing, pricing, platform support, and links to product downloads and reviews.
(Application Server Comparison Matrix)
|
|
