Get the real story via our monthly newsletter

Search

    2
    0

rss

Send to a colleague

Home > Commentary > Trends Archive > Benchmarking Java application servers

Browse TrendWatch Blog

Recent Blog Entries

The Complete Archive

Trends by Vendor


TrendWatch by Channel

Web Content Management Trends

Enterprise Portals Trends

ECM Trends

Web Analytics Trends

Enterprise Search Trends

SharePoint Trends

Digital & Media Asset Management Trends

XML & Component Content Management Trends

E-mail Archiving & Management Trends

Enterprise Social Software Trends


Report Excerpt

The Enterprise Portals Report 2008 looks at... Collaboration services in your portal

"As with other portal services, you will have a choice between lightweight collaboration tools built into the portal software versus more robust collaboration tools (which could be sold separately by your portal vendor or provided by another supplier) that you may have already licensed. Oftentimes project leaders opt for the basic tools that come with a portal simply because they can be faster to get up and running, but this means you may be supporting two different collaboration systems. Also,..."

(p. 6)

More about The Enterprise Portals Report 2008

 

TrendWatch Blog

Benchmarking Java application servers

21-Feb-2008

Ever wondered how the major Java EE application servers compare with regard to basic session-handling performance? Jonathan Campbell at Java-net has published some interesting numbers. Campbell ran the jRealBench benchmarks against JBoss, Glassfish, WebLogic, and WebSphere Community Edition, to test how many sessions each could create per second.

The results (drum roll, please) show WebSphere CE to be the winner, although not by a huge margin. What's perhaps surprising is that BEA WebLogic finished last, by a decisive margin. (WebSphere CE 2.0 processed 50 percent more hits per second than WebLogic 10.) A Java 1.5 JVM was used, presumably Sun's. It would be interesting to see the tests repeated using BEA's own vaunted JRockit JVM, which might give WebLogic a more favorable showing. (Then again, maybe not. It could further reinforce the existing differences.)

As with all benchmarks, the jRealKit numbers should be viewed with caution. There's a vast difference between repeating a simple operation thousands of times under lab conditions, and handling real-world user requests under real-world conditions. Garbage collection and caching issues tend to moot benchmark numbers pretty quickly. Nevertheless, the test results posted by Campbell (like election exit-poll results) make for interesting reading.

I bring this up to you because in our experience, Web CMS and (especially) Enterprise Portal customers employing Java-based solutions tend to underestimate the the degree to which the underlying appserver can affect performance, and the extent of lower-level tuning required to get the system to work speedily enough. Plan accordingly, and consider your own benchmarks.

- Submitted by: Kas Thomas, Analyst

All Portal Channel Trends

Join the conversation

Digg This! Search Technorati Tag it on Del.icio.us



Get a Free Sample

Wondering about CMS Watch research? Sign up to receive free samples of any of our products.




What we do

CMS Watch™ evaluates content-oriented technologies, publishing head-to-head comparative reviews of leading solutions. What makes us special?

  • Our critical analysis exposes product weaknesses as well as strengths
  • We deliver unrivaled technical depth and comprehensive project advice
  • Our research is led by international topic experts
  • We only work for buyers -- never for vendors

Contact us

CMS Watch

info@cmswatch.com

18113 Town Center Drive, Ste 217

Olney, MD USA 20832

1 800 325 6190 (N. America only)

+1 617 763 5336 (customer service)

+1 301 585 7004 (editorial)

Fax: +1 214 242 3048