Witango Version 5.0.1.037 Chimera (Win32) Test Report for With Enterprise Pty.

XRP Korea Inc.                                                                                                      29 Jun 2002

Cabsoftware Inc.

 

Greeting

Congratulation on new lunched for Witango v5 !

For New Target Market against ASP, .net and Java Developer and Web administrator,

this report was made.

I��m looking forward to announce to Witango v5 forlongtime with many developers.

 

This test composed the second group

ü         for loop performance

ü       256 thread for Multithreads

 

1.      for loop performance

 

Traditionally, Tango 2000 has low capacity [for loop] against another development tools,

This issue had to solve the problem first.

Compare with ASP, .net, EJB��, Tango��s interface in database is deemed largely satisfactory,

Like to <@NUMROWS> and <@ADDROWS> and for action, iteration function not enough

 

** For action in Tango was influenced by hardware system��s specification, We tested with Witango v5 and Tango 2000

 

System Specification for Server Specification:

ü         Model : Compaq Armada E500

ü         OS   : Window2k sp2 Korean version (5.00.2195)

ü         WWW   : IIS 5.0

ü         Memory : 393,688KB RAM

ü         CPU   : Intel mobile Pentium III 700 (x86 Family 6 Model 8 Stepping 6)

 

  

witango file for test

picture1. For Action TAF file for test

 

1.1 For Action Performance for Tango 2000

Version: Tango 2000 Application Server (Professional Edition) 4.05.047(Tango2000 SP1 4.5.47.0)

For loop times

1,000

10,000

100,000

Execution (mSeconds)

783

7300

79,000

 

1.2 For Action Performance for Witango v5

 Version: Witango Version 5.0.1.037 Chimera (Win32)

For loop times

1,000

10,000

100,000

Execution (mSeconds)

333

3300

34,800

 

 

 

 

CPU monitoring for test:

Picture2. Compare with Tango2000 and Witango v5 CPU Load

In Picture 2 As executed to the same taf file, We can see more fast Witango v5.

And We can find the top of graphic, Tango v5 more shortly than Tango2000

 

In running 1,000, 10,000 and 100,000 times, It��s seems to be improved the 2.2 times than Tango 2000.

Reply via email to