|
Sponsored Links
Resources
Enterprise Java
Research Library
Get Java white papers, product information, case studies and webcasts
|
News
News
News
|
Messages: 15
Messages: 15
Messages: 15
Printer friendly
Printer friendly
Printer friendly
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
XML
XML
XML
|
 |
883.66 JOPS@Standard on GlassFish V2
GlassFish V2 now has the best SPECjAppServer 2004 on Sun Fire T2000. Read Scot's blog for the details and caveats.
From Scot's blog..
"Good enough" is no longer good enough. Today, we posted the highest ever score for SPECjAppServer 2004 on a single Sun Fire T2000 application server: 883.66 JOPS@Standard. The Sun Fire T2000 in this case has a 1.4ghz CPU; the application also uses a Sun Fire T2000 running at 1.0ghz for its database tier. This result is 10% higher than WebLogic's score of 801.70 JOPS@Standard on the same appserver machine. In addition, this result is almost 70% higher than our previous score of 521.42 JOPS@Standard on a Sun Fire T2000, although that Sun Fire T2000 was running at only 1.2ghz. So that doesn't mean that we are 70% faster than we were, but we are quite substantially faster and are quite pleased to have the highest ever score on the Sun Fire T2000.
The result reflects improvements in many areas of GlassFish such as EJBs, JMS, JSP compilation, Servlet connector and container, connection pooling and CMP 2.1. GlassFish V2 has also improved in areas not covered by SPECjAppServer 2004 like Web Services, EJB 3.0, JSF, JPA and others.
[Editor's note: SPECjAppServer 2004 is neat, but uses outdated technologies that many performance-oriented programmers would prefer not to use any more: EJB 2.x, JSP are good examples. It'd be interesting to see an equivalent to SPECjAppServer updated to use things like Spring, EJB 3.0, perhaps some of the newer and speedier templating technologies. Any takers? ... Of course, SPECjAppServer is a lot of work... it's not a matter of just implementing an equivalent in a day or so. But it'd still be interesting to see an updated version.]
So, what's your experience with GlassFish? Have you used it?
Message was edited by: joeo@enigmastation.com
|
|
|
Message #236475
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: 883.66 JOPS@Standard on GlassFish V2
I used Glassfish V1 and V2.
I think other AS are superior, like JBoss, Geronimo
and, of course, WebLogic.
|
|
|
Message #236476
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: 883.66 JOPS@Standard on GlassFish V2
SPECjAppServer 2004 is neat, but uses outdated technologies that many performance-oriented programmers would prefer not to use any more: EJB 2.x, JSP are good examples.
This assumes that these particular technologies contribute greatly to the performance profile of the benchmark. It also assumes that the design of the technology and/or benchmark precludes optimizations available in newer technologies such as reduction in the number of expensive SQL statements executed which by the way was a significant factor in the 2002 version of this benchmark.
What would be much more useful in the published results would be to have a complete breakdown of the performance profile across tiers, layers, components and resources. Then we could ascertain whether improvements are a result of changes in the database product, application server request pipeline, memory usage, resource interaction, JVM (GC!!!),....
With this type of information there would be less black magic and a better awareness of the strengths and weaknesses in each product stack.
I would be very interested in creating an execution profile so that a standard performance model could be obtained for comparison across products. The execution profile could also be used to verify that the benchmark was actually performed in the same manner (transaction semantics) as designed. Unfortunately the last time I looked one had to pay to obtain the binaries even for non-reporting purposes.
regards,
William Louth
JXInsight Product Architect
CTO, JINSPIRED
"Performance monitoring and problem management for Java EE, SOA and Grid Computing"
http://www.jinspired.com
|
|
|
Message #236477
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: 883.66 JOPS@Standard on GlassFish V2
I think other AS are superior, like JBoss, Geronimo and, of course, WebLogic.
Superior in what?
|
|
|
Message #236478
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: 883.66 JOPS@Standard on GlassFish V2
I would be very interested in creating an execution profile so that a standard performance model could be obtained for comparison across products. The execution profile could also be used to verify that the benchmark was actually performed in the same manner (transaction semantics) as designed. Unfortunately the last time I looked one had to pay to obtain the binaries even for non-reporting purposes.
And finally I would get the "good heap size" numbers. :-)
|
|
|
Message #236497
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: 883.66 JOPS@Standard on GlassFish V2
I used Glassfish V1 and V2.
I think other AS are superior, like JBoss, Geronimo
and, of course, WebLogic.
Content-free seems to be the name of the game, so I'll just say
I disagree.
|
|
|
Message #236500
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: 883.66 JOPS@Standard on GlassFish V2
Working on a Java EE performance management product means I spend a significant amount of time with each of the major application servers (that do install and work out of the box).
Glassfish has come on leaps and bounds in the last year. You would be very foolish to not include the product in any application server evaluation especially as it has a complete application administration web console that is comparable to offerings from the leading commercial vendors and far exceeds anything offered by other open source vendors (if at all).
regards,
William
|
|
|
Message #236516
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: 883.66 JOPS@Standard on GlassFish V2
I used Glassfish V1 and V2.
I think other AS are superior, like JBoss, Geronimo
and, of course, WebLogic.
Will be very interested in knowing your comparison basis. Glassfish V2 is open source, and performs better than these open source and paid Application Servers. Open source and being performant is a win-win for customers..
Wouldn't it be nice to see some performance publications from other open source application servers.
|
|
|
Message #236537
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Pleasure to deal with
I've been using v1 and v2 for over six months now, and they've been a pleasure to deal with. Admittedly a lot of that is the new JEE 5 changes, but in terms of price tag, deployment, Ant scripting, administration interface, IDE integration and general time-to-fix for defects its been a step up from any other AS I've had to code for. Certainly the AS' you've mentioned don't rate above GF for me, in any departments.
|
|
|
Message #236572
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: 883.66 JOPS@Standard on GlassFish V2
Hi William,
I also find it surprising that a popular open source vendor who claims (or claimed) to have the most downloads ever - has never ever published a SPECjAppServer result.
How do the performance characteristics of this product compare with others based on your experience?
-krish
PS: Long time, no hear. Regards to Rod Peacock as well.
|
|
|
Message #236579
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: 883.66 JOPS@Standard on GlassFish V2
I used GF v1, and I found many bugs....whereas many other AS don't have.
Moreover, GF has no widely used features like: AOP.
Every time I go on GF home page, I see a beta/alfa/bugged version to download! Whereas Jboss is stable.
I prefer Jboss, it is free and has many good features to use!
|
|
|
Message #236583
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: 883.66 JOPS@Standard on GlassFish V2
To be honest my experience with GF has been mainly in the labs were testing performance testing is focused on our core components and services and not the application server.
I have seen noticeable improvements in the inter component request processing (CORBA) which I believe has been worked on over the last year. It will probably never be a fast as the Borland application server in the good old days, ;-).
With many of the application servers using similar technologies (i.e. TopLink and Tomcat) the bigger battle (at least in terms of performance management) is in the scalability of the distributed application management and not just the raw runtime performance. What's the point of being the fastest at executing a piece of byte code or processing a client request when you are also the fastest at crashing. Scalability is not just a runtime concern (number of clients/requests) but a deployment concern (number of nodes/cells/partitions/apps/...). How does one go about designing a global & local deployment topologies that balance many concerns (scalability, reliability, performance, manageability,.......)?
Kind regards,
William
PS: Rod is fine and working hard on platform ports.
|
|
|
Message #236584
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Different JVM versions
This is not an apples-to-apples comparison. Sun "forgot" to mention in their blog is that the WLS result is using Sun JDK 1.5.0_10, whereas the Sun app server was using JDK 6.0 Update 2. Sun stated in the Java 6 release that the new JDK was significantly faster than JDK 5, and Sun has also made a fair set of improvements in JDK 6 Update 2. While we cannot know how much of a difference this makes, there are lots of results out there that indicate that it may be significant.
Also, the comparison is using Sun hardware on Sun's OS and with Sun's JDK. And both submissions - WLS and the Sun app server - were made by Sun. As were the older WLS and WebSphere submissions that Scott allude to in the blog. So all we are seeing is Sun leapfrogging themselves on their own platform.
Henrik Stahl (BEA)
|
|
|
Message #236585
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: 883.66 JOPS@Standard on GlassFish V2
I used GF v1, and I found many bugs....whereas many other AS don't have.
</blockqoute>
"many" relatively to what?
We are talking about Glassfish v2 which is the only open source vendor that has published benchmark results and is Java EE 5 compatible.
Moreover, GF has no widely used features like: AOP.
</blockqoute>
Sorry but it is relatively easy to add AOP into most application server runtimes. I am currently working on a major AspectJ (AOP!) extension to our performance management product that will work with Glassfish and other application servers including JBoss AS.
Recent AspectJ Blog Entries
http://blog.jinspired.com/?cat=38
regards,
William
|
|
|
Message #236605
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
If you want JDK6, you have to use glassfish
Henrik makes a good point that JDK 6 contributes to our performance (though probably not as much as he assumes). Which is yet another reason why Glassfish is the superior appserver: we've supported JDK 6 for more than 6 months. Weblogic doesn't support it today, and as far as I've heard they have no plans on supporting it for months to come.
So it's not apples-to-apples, but then again, neither is the marketplace.
|
|
|
Message #236627
Post reply
Post reply
Post reply
Go to top
Go to top
Go to top
|
|
Re: If you want JDK6, you have to use glassfish
Hi Scott,
This does point out that benchmarks are much more useful to vendors than customers especially since every customer application has a different profile in terms of transaction (in the business use case sense) mix and technology stack.
Without a transparent software execution model (best case, execution graph) as well as a system execution model (performance characteristics under different workloads) customers are as blind as ever to the runtime differences.
That said the benchmarks do at least keep the major application server vendors pushing ahead with general runtime performance improvements even if at times there is some "black magic" or "custom tailoring" used to win a temporary lead. I think it is more important that each vendor keeps jostling for a better position in the race and less so who is the current leader. Of course the performance engineering team must be happy with the results which by and large are valid for most customers and not just those few using Java 6.
regards,
William
|
|
|
| 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)
Mastering EJB was one of the original and most influential EJB books in the industry. Mastering EJB III now returns with two new expert co-authors, updated for EJB 2.1 and 30% new chapters including security, integration, best practices, open source, 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)
|
|
