On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Jakub Bartecek <[email protected]> wrote: > https://github.com/jbartece/undertow4jenkins
Interesting work indeed. I guess section 2.6.3 of https://github.com/jbartece/undertow4jenkins/blob/master/thesis/tex/projekt.pdf?raw=true about comparison with Jetty is the crucial thing to explore, if we are to move off of a familiar and battle-tested container. Runtime responsiveness is definitely of interest; it sounds like the improvements could be on the order of a few percent, which matters. Is the measured speedup mostly related to serving static resources, or better general stream handling, or something else? Startup time of the servlet container is probably negligible compared to that of Jenkins core. You suggested that startup time might be significant in the context of Jenkins’ hour-long integration tests, but I doubt it is a major contributor, certainly not 50%; would be happy to be proven wrong. (By the way replacing the bundled container has no effect on the web container used by integration tests; this is hardcoded to be Jetty, in JenkinsRule/HudsonTestCase. Acceptance tests using the default “Winstone” controller run Jenkins as a JAR and so would use the currently bundled container; these also make actual HTTP requests heavily, whereas integration tests only occasionally do so, and so could really be affected by the choice of container.) 2% reduction in application size would be nice, though not a prime consideration. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
