Michele,

Impressive results! Looking forward to seeing this develop.

On 17 February 2018 at 14:21, Michele Sciabarra <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hello, Whiskers!
>
> Before starting to implement the support with pipes, I run some benchmarks.
> I wanted to be sure I were not wasting time doing something useless.
>
> Well, I was rewarded by numbers much better than I expected.
> Without any further ado here there are the results:
>
> |     Label     | # Samples | Average | Median | 90% Line | 95% Line | 99%
> Line | Min | Max  |
> |---------------|-----------|---------|--------|----------|-
> ---------|----------|-----|------|
> | Python+System |     10000 |     673 |    686 |      766 |      797 |
>   853 |  10 | 1180 |
> | GoServer      |     10000 |       2 |      2 |        3 |        6 |
>    15 |   1 |   78 |
>
>
> The test is just ONE, with 100 threads running 100 requests. However the
> numbers are pretty eloquent.
>
> Basically, on average a request to the Go server took 2 milliseconds,
> against an average of 673 ms for the docker support.
> Also 90% of requests in Go took less that 3 ms, against 766ms with the
> system call.
>
> No surprise here no one uses CGI anymore since a long time!
>
> ---
>
> Also the size of the images is significant:
>
> | sciabarracom/openwhisk-hello   latest              43425039e090        2
> hours ago         16.7MB |
> | sciabarracom/openwhisk-exec    latest              ba516ca87a68        2
> hours ago         10.4MB |
> | openwhisk/dockerskeleton       latest              25d1878c2f31        4
> months ago        109MB  |
> | openwhisk/python3action        latest              e7346758b201        4
> months ago        289MB  |
>
> (the `openwhisk-image` is the image with the proxy and the action, while
> the `openwhisk-exec` contains just the proxy)
>
> ---
>
> All the instructions how to run the benchmark by yourself are in the repo
> here:
>
> https://github.com/sciabarracom/openwhisk-runtime-go
>
> --
>   Michele Sciabarra
>   [email protected]
>



-- 
Regards,
James Thomas

Reply via email to