On Tue, 10 Oct 2000, Brian Goetz wrote:
>
> >What I am consistently seeing is Velocity being 20-30%
> >faster then WM _everytime_ after the first round. And
> >the load monitor shows that Velocity uses far less of
> >the system resources. If someone can help me locate the
> >initial startup problem we will have something
> >substantially faster then WM.
>
> You probably already know this, but bear in mind that WM, out of the box,
> doesn't cache templates. If you want to do a fair apples to apples
> performance test, you'll want to turn on the WM template caching which
> involves changing a line in the config file.
The caching was on. I made sure of that.
Before I publish any more results I am going to make
a benchmarking kit: templates, jar files, scripts. Package
it up and allow anyone to run the tests themselves easily.
I certainly don't want to mislead anyone, and I'm all for
making kit that can be verified by anyone.
jvz.
