Christopher Blythe wrote:
Actually, I'm suggesting we pull the web services out of DayTrader all
together and write another web services sample app. If DayTrader is
truly meant to be a performance benchmark, why would you leave
something in there that is in clear violation of performance
Actually, I'm suggesting we pull the web services out of DayTrader all
together and write another web services sample app. If DayTrader is truly
meant to be a performance benchmark, why would you leave something in
there that is in clear violation of performance best practices. Doesn't
exactly
Jeff... I agree with you on both counts. Perhaps I should present this from
another vantage point. If you were an application developer, would you use
web services in the manner they are currently used in DayTrader? Or would
you try to adhere to most documented best practices and steer clear of
Christopher Blythe wrote:
Jeff... I agree with you on both counts. Perhaps I should present this
from another vantage point. If you were an application developer, would
you use web services in the manner they are currently used in DayTrader?
Or would you try to adhere to most documented best
On Oct 3, 2007, at 7:36 AM, Jeff Genender wrote:
Christopher Blythe wrote:
Jeff... I agree with you on both counts. Perhaps I should present
this
from another vantage point. If you were an application developer,
would
you use web services in the manner they are currently used in
ah now you're pointing out the distinctions between primitives and a
real application workload. currently, the web services within daytrader
are presented in the context of a workload not a primitive.
if you want to measure the web services overhead and the impact of payloads
with varying
So to cl;arify I think DayTrader may be mis-characterized as only a
benchmark. I think it is used for a variety of functions of which
only one aspect is performance. the other aspects are testing
infrastructure, sample application (which includes deployments plans
for various pieces of
ahh... come on matt... this is good discussion... we finally have people
thinking (and talking) about where we should or shouldn't take DayTrader in
the future. there hasn't been enough of that!
i think short term, the disclaimers serve the purpose. however, long term...
daytrader will lose it's
heh .. didn't mean to derail discussion. I think what would make
sense would be to move the web services from runtime mode to a set of
primitives. Does it make sense to also rework the message for what
DayTrader is all about?
On Oct 3, 2007, at 1:34 PM, Christopher Blythe wrote:
ahh...
On Oct 1, 2007, at 11:23 PM, Christopher Blythe wrote:
Matt...
In summary, I guess I really just wanted to say that I feel the web
services modes in DayTrader should be removed at least until we can
come up with something better. If the only reason to keep these
around is to provide a
I'm going to port the market summary interval changes back from 2.0
to 1.2 so we can get comparable numbers between the versions. With
that I'd like to sugggest we wrap up 1.2 and 2.0 and release these.
Are there any outstanding changes folks want before we let these
releases out?
Matt...
Here are a few minor things that come to mind.
- Ensure license files, etc. are up to snuff
- Review readme files to make sure instructions are correct. For the J2EE
client apps, there should be
some mention of setting the endorsed directory
- Make sure config changes are propagated to
12 matches
Mail list logo
