The benchmark was swapping MINA and Grizzly, both using AsyncWeb... I think you're maybe thinking of Grizzly as synonymous with Glassfish? They pulled it out into a generic NIO framework along the lines of MINA.
On 5/24/07, John Preston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
OK. I was looking at the Tomcat vd grizzly benchmark. But then its a bit strange. If your'e only 10% faster than tomcat but 50% faster than MINA. That 50% is with AsyncWeb on MINA. So its not a bench mark of MINA alone the application on MINA. I chose MINA for a simple fast scalable server that would server up data files via HTTP requests and MINA for me at the time (about 1 year ago) was the quickest, most simple to use. I remember trying tomcat but it was too big and wasn't that fast for simple responses, so I'm not sure that the 50% is MINA or AsyncWeb. I also agree java.net has some very useful projects, and for me, I appreciate being able to read other implementation details and see whether they have any use for me. Also lets remember that SUN, like everybody else has the right to beat their chest and say they are the best. Its for us to ignore them when we see that its more ego than anything substantial. Anyway, back to the matter of benchmarks. it might be nice to have a set of classes that would allow one to create a test of various operations using MINA, and so from version to version, patches included, we could keep track of whether we are improving things. John On 5/24/07, Adam Fisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I hear you. Sun's generally just annoying. It would just probably be worth > taking a look under the hood to see if there's any real magic there > regardless of all th politics. Wish I could volunteer to do it, but I've > got a startup to run! > > Thanks. > > -Adam > > > On 5/24/07, Alex Karasulu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Oh yes I agree with you completely. I was really referring to how > > benchmarks are > > being used as marketing tools and published to discredit other projects. > > Also I > > believe that there are jewels at java.net as well. And you read me right: > > I'm no fan > > of SUN nor it's "open source" efforts. > > > > <OT> > > Back in the day when Bill Joy and Scott McNealy were at the helm I had a > > profound sense of > > respect for SUN. I actually wanted to become an engineer there. Now, > > IMO, > > they're a completely > > different beast driven by marketing rather than engineering principals. I > > feel they resort to base > > practices that show a different character than the noble SUN I was used > > to. > > It's sad to know that > > the SUN many of us respected and looked up to has long since died. > > </OT> > > > > Regarding benchmarks they are great for internal metrics and shedding > > light > > on differences in > > architecture that could produce more efficient software. I'm a big fan of > > competing > > against our own releases - meaning benchmarking a baseline and looking at > > the > > performance progression of the software as it evolves with time. Also > > testing other > > frameworks is good for just showing how different scenarios are handled > > better > > with different architectures: I agree that we can learn a lot from these > > tests. > > > > I just don't want to use metrics to put down other projects. It's all > > about > > how you use > > the metrics which I think was my intent on the last post. This perhaps is > > why I am a > > bit disgusted with these tactics which are not in line with open source > > etiquette but > > rather the mark of commercially driven and marketing oriented OSS efforts. > > > > Alex > > > > On 5/24/07, Adam Fisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I agree on the tendency to manipulate benchmarks, but that doesn't mean > > > benchmarks aren't a useful tool. How else can we evaluate > > performance? I > > > guess I'm most curious about what the two projects might be able to > > learn > > > from each other. I would suspect MINA's APIs are significantly easier > > to > > > use than Grizzly's, for example, and it wouldn't surprise me at all if > > > Sun's > > > benchmarks were somewhat accurate. I hate Sun's java.net projects as > > much > > > as the next guy, but that doesn't mean there's not an occasional jewel > > in > > > there. > > > > > > It would at least be worth running independent tests. If the > > differences > > > are even close to the claims, it would make a ton of sense to just copy > > > their ideas. No need for too much pride on either side! Just seems > > like > > > they've put a ton of work into rigorously analyzing the performance > > > tradeoffs of different design decisions, and it might make sense to take > > > advantage of that. If their benchmarks are off and MINA performs > > better, > > > then they should go ahead and copy MINA. > > > > > > That's all assuming the performance tweaks don't make the existing APIs > > > unworkable. > > > > > > -Adam > > > > > > > > > On 5/24/07, Alex Karasulu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 5/24/07, Mladen Turk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Adam Fisk wrote: > > > > > > The slides were just posted from this Java One session claiming > > > > Grizzly > > > > > > blows MINA away performance-wise, and I'm just curious as to > > > people's > > > > > views > > > > > > on it. They present some interesting ideas about optimizing > > > selector > > > > > > threading and ByteBuffer use. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://developers.sun.com/learning/javaoneonline/j1sessn.jsp?sessn=TS-2992&yr=2007&track=5 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I love the slide 20! > > > > > JFA finally admitted that Tomcat's APR-NIO is faster then JDK one ;) > > > > > However last time I did benchmarks it was much faster then 10%. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe someone could comment on the performance improvements in > > MINA > > > > > > 2.0? > > > > > > > > > > He probably compared MINA's Serial IO, and that is not usable > > > > > for production (jet). I wonder how it would look with real > > > > > async http server. > > > > > Nevertheless, benchmarks are like assholes. Everyone has one. > > > > > > > > > > > > Exactly! > > > > > > > > Incidentally SUN has been trying to attack several projects via the > > > > performance angle for > > > > some time now. Just recently I received a cease and desist letter > > from > > > > them > > > > when I > > > > compiled some performance metrics. The point behind it is was that we > > > > were > > > > not correctly > > > > configuring their products. I guess they just want to make sure > > things > > > > are > > > > setup to their > > > > advantage. That's what all these metrics revolve around and if you > > ask > > > me > > > > they're not worth > > > > a damn. There is a million ways to make one product perform better > > than > > > > another depending > > > > on configuration, environment and the application. However is raw > > > > performance metrics as > > > > important as a good flexible design? > > > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > >
