It's hard to make a comparison without knowing exactly how their tests were
written. Especially being from the company of the product being recognized
as "superior". Storm is still young in the larger community and I certainly
think there's place for it to grow.


On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 9:03 PM, Jon Logan <[email protected]> wrote:

> The claims are certainly interesting...I haven't looked through it super
> detailed, but I would definitely keep in mind who is making the claims.
> Looking at it briefly, it looks like something is really wrong, looking at
> their scaling graphs. Without further information, I think it's hard to
> properly analyze their results, especially coming from a competing vendor.
>
>
> I don't know where this 40k figure comes from...coming from IBM's own
> cost-analysis paper, the pricing is more like starting at 500k, and easily
> going 1mil+.
>
> http://public.dhe.ibm.com/common/ssi/ecm/en/ime14024usen/IME14024USEN.PDF
>
>
> It would be interesting if they posted their source code, to see if
> they're doing something silly, or if anyone could rectify their performance
> issues. Otherwise, I think it's fair to assume this is potentially a
> "novice" versus "first-party supported expert" comparisons of
> implementations.
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>>
>> Anybody who has ever only paid 40K$ to IBM for anything should deserve a
>> prize.  That is just the entry fee.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 7:46 AM, Marc Vaillant 
>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>>  To play devil's advocate, if you believe the stream performance gains,
>>> then the 40k will likely pay for itself in needing to deploy a fraction
>>> of the resources for the same throughput.
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 09:02:53AM -0400, John Welcher wrote:
>>> > Hi
>>> >
>>> > Streams also cost 40,000 US while Storm is free.
>>> >
>>> > John
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 3:49 AM, Klausen Schaefersinho <
>>> > [email protected]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >     Hi,
>>> >
>>> >     I found some interesting comparison of IBM Stream and Storm:
>>> >
>>> >     https://www.ibmdw.net/streamsdev/2014/04/22/streams-apache-storm/
>>> >
>>> >     It also includes an interesting comparison between ZeroMQ and the
>>> Netty
>>> >     Performance.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >     Cheers,
>>> >
>>> >     Klaus
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to