>As Phil Costa says: > >"-- Improved performance over CFMX Enterprise because we did additional >optimization to take advantage of the J2EE architecture" > >So, yes, there is a performance difference between CFMX Enterprise and >CFMX for J2EE on JRun 4, and this is more noticeable on multi-processor >systems. >
Yeah, I caught that too. Based on both of the above statements, is there a performance brief available that compares MX Enterprise vs. MX for JRun? If not, will one be put together? Is there any sort of document that outlines the differences, optimization or otherwise, between the two engines? It sounds as if the brief comparing MX Enterprise to MX for WebSphere helps you "put your best foot forward" in terms of marketing to potential clients (assuming that WebSphere is where you're seeing the greatest performance for MX for J2EE). But it seems like it would be a good marketing tool to show benchmarks as to how well your own products work together (JRun 4 and MX for JRun) instead of relying on a third-party J2EE vendor. I could see this being especially useful for smaller companies that are interested in integrating MX and J2EE, but don't have the budget to spring for a major vendor's license. But, again, I'm relatively new to J2EE servers, so there could be a very simple reason for doing what you've done. Perhaps the two engines are so close that a comparison between MX Enterprise and MX for JRun would be fruitless? Either way, I'd love to hear your thoughts. Regards, Dave. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm
