Tomcat Benchmark Procedure - Benchmark results and summary (
Page 2 of 4 )
We ran the benchmarks and graphed the results data as bar charts, listing the web server configurations in descending performance order (one graph per test per computer). First, we look at how the machines did in the small text files benchmark (see Figures 4-3 and 4-4).
Notice that Figures 4-3 and 4-4 look very similar. On both machines, Tomcat standalone JIO is the fastest web server for serving these static text files, followed by APR, followed by NIO. The two build configurations of Apache httpd came in fourth and fifth fastest, followed by all of the permutations of Apache httpd connected to Tomcat via a connector module. And, dominating the slow end of the graphs is mod_jk.
Figure 4-3. Benchmark results for serving small text files on the AMD64 laptop
Figure 4-4. Benchmark results for serving small text files on the EM64T tower
It is also interesting to compare the requests per second results for one web server configuration on both graphs. The AMD64 laptop has one single core processor, and the EM64T has two single core processors; thus, if dual EM64T computer works efficiently, and if the operating system and JVM can effectively take advantage of both processors, the dual EM64T computer should be able to sustain slightly less than double the requests per second that the single processor AMD64 machine could. Of course, this assumes that the two processor models are equally fast at executing instructions; they may not be. But, comparing the results for the two computers, the same web server configuration on the dual EM64T computer does sustain nearly double the requests per second, minus a percent for the overhead of the two processors sharing one set of system resources, such as RAM, data and I/O buses, and so on. This one computer with two processors in it can handle nearly the same number of requests that two single processor computers can, and both Tomcat and Apache httpd
are able to take advantage of that.
Next, we examine the results of the 9k image files benchmark on both machines. Figures 4-5 and 4-6 show the results for the AMD64 computer and the dual EM64T computer, respectively.
Figure 4-5. Benchmark results for serving 9k image files on the AMD64 laptop
In Figure 4-5, you can see that on AMD64, Tomcat standalone JIO wins again, with Apache httpd
worker MPM trailing close behind. In this benchmark, their performance is nearly identical, with Tomcat standalone APR in a very close third place. Tomcat standalone NIO is in fourth place, trailing a little behind APR. Apache httpd prefork MPM is fifth fastest again behind all of the Tomcat standalone configurations. Slower still are all of the permutations of Apache httpd
connecting to Tomcat via connector modules. This time, we observed mod_jk
perform about average among the connector modules, with some configurations of mod_proxy_http
performing the slowest.
Figure 4-6 is somewhat different, showing that on the dual EM64T, Apache httpd
edges slightly ahead of Tomcat standalone’s fastest connector: JIO. The difference in performance between the two is very small—about 1 percent. This may hint that there is a difference in how EM64T behaves versus AMD64. It appears that Apache httpd
is 1 percent faster than Tomcat on EM64T when serving the image files, at least on the computers we benchmarked. You should not assume this is the case with newer computers, as many hardware details change! Also, we observed all three Tomcat standalone connectors performing better than Apache httpd
prefork in this set of benchmarks. The configurations where Apache httpd
connects to Tomcat via a connector module were again the slowest performing configurations, with mod_jk
performing the slowest.
Figure 4-6. Benchmark results for serving 9k image files on the EM64T tower
