On 30. 12. 2022. 17:35, Gordan Krešić wrote:
Out of curiosity, I decided to compare performance of making a gRPC call vs.
making a REST call. To my surprise, gRPC turned out to be several times slower.
I'm hoping that I'm just missing something obvious.
No, other than that one should never
On 03. 01. 2023. 23:57, 'Sergii Tkachenko' via grpc.io wrote:
Just an idea - did you try to run `ghz` with the `--async` flag. It might make
sense to play around with `--skipFirst` flag as well, so that first request to
not pre-warmed JVM do not bias the result.
Also - looks like REST wrk
s/first request/first requests/
On Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 2:57:21 PM UTC-8 Sergii Tkachenko wrote:
> Just an idea - did you try to run `ghz` with the `--async` flag. It might
> make sense to play around with `--skipFirst` flag as well, so that first
> request to not pre-warmed JVM do not
Just an idea - did you try to run `ghz` with the `--async` flag. It might
make sense to play around with `--skipFirst` flag as well, so that first
request to not pre-warmed JVM do not bias the result.
Also - looks like REST wrk benchmark uses 400 connections, while gRPC ghz
just one? Consider
I would think it is going to depend heavily on the work the gRPC service method
does, not GRPC itself. Since the REST/HTTP protocol is already less efficient
than the gRPC one - the former is going to dominate it in terms of relative
performance.
> On Nov 7, 2018, at 1:31 PM, dineshs via
We are using ab to hit REST endpoints.
ab -> REST server (GRPC Client) -> GRPC server
In this case the protobuf deserialization is happening on the REST server
using the real client. AB is not performing the protobuf deserialization.
On Tuesday, November 6, 2018 at 1:27:57 PM UTC-8, Carl
I'm not sure ab is a very good benchmark tool. It used to be years ago,
but I haven't seen it used in a long time. Also, by using it you avoid the
deserialization that a real client would do.
On Tuesday, November 6, 2018 at 10:39:49 AM UTC-8, din...@wepay.com wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Using gRPC
Hi Sree,
any updates? we also found that some data is
missing:
https://performance-dot-grpc-testing.appspot.com/explore?dashboard=5636470266134528
Nan
On Thursday, March 8, 2018 at 8:36:04 PM UTC-8, Sree Kuchibhotla wrote:
>
> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. The numbers look very
Thanks for bringing this to our attention. The numbers look very low for
C++ (especially for unary, its way too low). We are investigating..
thanks,
Sree
On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 4:38 PM 'Matt Kwong' via grpc.io <
grpc-io@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> +grpc-io
>
> Unfortunately, I'm not the best
+grpc-io
Unfortunately, I'm not the best person to answer this question. Adding
grpc-io, so that someone working on C++ or Java performance can answer
this.
On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 4:10 PM, Nan Dun wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
>
>
> This is Nan from Quantcast. Our team at Quantcast
10 matches
Mail list logo