mina-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alex Karasulu" <akaras...@apache.org>
Subject Re: grizzly versus mina
Date Thu, 24 May 2007 16:44:51 GMT
On 5/24/07, Mladen Turk <mturk@apache.org> wrote:
> Adam Fisk wrote:
> > The slides were just posted from this Java One session claiming Grizzly
> > blows MINA away performance-wise, and I'm just curious as to people's
> views
> > on it.  They present some interesting ideas about optimizing selector
> > threading and ByteBuffer use.
> >
> >
> http://developers.sun.com/learning/javaoneonline/j1sessn.jsp?sessn=TS-2992&yr=2007&track=5
> >
> I love the slide 20!
> JFA finally admitted that Tomcat's APR-NIO is faster then JDK one ;)
> However last time I did benchmarks it was much faster then 10%.
> >
> > Maybe someone could comment on the performance improvements in MINA
> > 2.0?
> He probably compared MINA's Serial IO, and that is not usable
> for production (jet). I wonder how it would look with real
> async http server.
> Nevertheless, benchmarks are like assholes. Everyone has one.


Incidentally SUN has been trying to attack several projects via the
performance angle for
some time now.  Just recently I received a cease and desist letter from them
when I
compiled some performance metrics.  The point behind it is was that we were
not correctly
configuring their products.  I guess they just want to make sure things are
setup to their
advantage.  That's what all these metrics revolve around and if you ask me
they're not worth
a damn.  There is a million ways to make one product perform better than
another depending
on configuration, environment and the application.  However is raw
performance metrics as
important as a good flexible design?


  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message