Comments on Paul Kukiel - and what i'm interested in.: ColdFusion 8, 9 and Railo Object creation speed te...

You really should test with a Complex CFC with man...

2009-10-05T11:21:25.655-04:00

You really should test with a Complex CFC with many functions (even simple set/get functions) as that has been CF's weakness in the past (since each function compiles down to an Object in java)

Oops, sorry, that URL had an "event:" pr...

2009-07-21T17:11:34.831-04:00

Oops, sorry, that URL had an "event:" prefix from TweetDeck :( Here it is:
http://bit.ly/iaABJ

Here's a bunch more tests of a similar nature,...

2009-07-21T17:10:38.113-04:00

Here's a bunch more tests of a similar nature, all in a very controlled testing environment with a consistent servlet engine (Tomcat):
event:http://bit.ly/iaABJ

@Michael Offner Well I just upgraded from .22 to ...

2009-07-21T10:01:29.473-04:00

@Michael Offner

Well I just upgraded from .22 to .23 and in a virtual machine under glassfish, Railo now got as high as:

Railo
1.344
74404.7619

Impressive.

Railo rules again ;-) we have added the same featu...

2009-07-21T03:10:37.229-04:00

Railo rules again ;-)
we have added the same feature (request based trusted cache for templates), cf9 has to railo 3.1.0.023.
with help of this feature railo beats cf9 again in every situation.

@Paul, honestly I have no clue why they are keepin...

2009-07-19T13:12:48.678-04:00

@Paul, honestly I have no clue why they are keeping JRun around. It's not even sold any longer and there are far better open source servlets around these days.

@Peter I was chatting to Matt Woodward about this ...

2009-07-19T10:39:12.939-04:00

@Peter
I was chatting to Matt Woodward about this and I was under the assumption that the servlet affects the speed of the CFML engine. Matt confirmed my suspicion and I feel a fair test you be to run all 4 Engines under the same servlet ( tomcat/jrun/glassfish etc ) this would be a really good comparison and I would really look forward to your results under Ubuntu.

The hinting results here might be leading to a performance decrease due to jrun and its not the first time I have heard of such gripe with jrun either.

Just thought it would be funny if I could beat the...

2009-07-19T04:51:12.940-04:00

Just thought it would be funny if I could beat the any of the posted times on your blog Paul with Open BD / Tomcat / Apache / CrunchBang Linux on my Asus 1000HE netbook with an Intel Atom 1.6mhz mobile processor. So I ran your test code:

13.086 seconds for 100k objects
7641.75 objects per second

Looks that beats CF8 on mobile processing power. Anyways, it's a completely unfair comparison since I'm not matching CFML engine against engine, but it is funny to try to do it with an Atom processor.

I'm post tomorrow with my real rig using Tomcat / Open BD / CF8 / CF9 / Railo on Ubuntu.

Just ran on OpenBD 1.1: Objects: 100000 Seconds: 4...

2009-07-17T09:34:27.739-04:00

Just ran on OpenBD 1.1:
Objects: 100000
Seconds: 4.17
Objects per Second: 23980.8153477

This is OpenBD 1.1 on Tomcat 6.0.18 on a MacBook Pro running Ubuntu.

@Markus Moser Markus you are quite right. I rece...

2009-07-17T09:19:35.528-04:00

@Markus Moser

Markus you are quite right. I received the same results when I turn off the cache in CF8 and 9 it seams Railo is still king by a long shot with regards to object creation. ( in this limited test anyway )

@Rupesh Kumar

I have added the code that I used.

cf9 is not faster than cf8, the only differents be...

2009-07-17T06:41:59.874-04:00

cf9 is not faster than cf8, the only differents between this versions are that cf9 has 2 new caching mechanism:
- Cache Template In Request
- Component cache

when you disable this caches in admin, cf9 has the same speed as cf8.

Paul, Would it be possible to share the code that ...

2009-07-17T00:58:17.434-04:00

Paul,
Would it be possible to share the code that you used to compare the performance?

Rupesh

good good

2009-07-16T21:03:13.306-04:00

good good

I look forward to seeing the OpenBD results as wel...

2009-07-16T18:34:21.237-04:00

I look forward to seeing the OpenBD results as well. Thanks for posting your finds. =)

The CF9 test I ran was inside an XP virtual machin...

2009-07-16T18:17:41.379-04:00

The CF9 test I ran was inside an XP virtual machine with nothing but CF9 installed. It was using the standard CF9 config (Java version 1.6.0_12, 512MB heap) with debug turned off. Just tried again now and was getting around 30K objects per second. I am just curious because you have a much better spec machine than I am testing on so I would have expected higher CF9 numbers (considering your CF8 test was significantly faster than mine). I'll look forward to seeing your OpenBD test.

I ran it a bunch of times it did get upto ~15k but...

2009-07-16T17:29:45.089-04:00

I ran it a bunch of times it did get upto ~15k but no higher with 512 ram I adjusted the jvm memory to 2048 and it got as high as 17.5k but that was the peak for me.

Interesting results. With your CF9 test did you ru...

2009-07-16T17:19:55.494-04:00

Interesting results. With your CF9 test did you run the test just once or multiple times? I found that the first time I ran the test it created around 10,000 objects. I ran the test a couple more times and each time the number of objects increased up to a limit of around 25,000 per second.

I am running this test in a local Dev environment ...

2009-07-16T16:27:17.988-04:00

I am running this test in a local Dev environment on a Dell Studio XPS w/ Core i7 920 and 6GB on Vista Home Premium 64bit.

I am a big fan of GlassFish and v3 is even faster. I am sure in deployment, on a real server you could get the test times down to 1 second.

So the jee server cause slowness? I would like to...

2009-07-16T15:55:06.721-04:00

So the jee server cause slowness? I would like to test CF8, 9 Railo and OpenDB all on the save platform perhaps Tomcat and see how they compare.

Your CF9 tests are very impressive implying we should all switch to Solaris?

My guess is Railo is much faster here because it i...

2009-07-16T15:51:01.010-04:00

My guess is Railo is much faster here because it is running on jetty and CF9 is running on the internal server?

My tests (deployed as a war on Sun GlassFish ES 2.1) show CF9 being about twice as fast as Railo 3.1.0.22.

CF9:
2.233 :seconds to complete
44782.8034035 :objects per second

My Railo tests resulted in similar times as the ones you posted.

Also I just checked openbd and it cannot render the test as is (fails on < and i++).

Nice... Is it because CF9 is still based on the C...

2009-07-16T15:08:31.040-04:00

Nice...

Is it because CF9 is still based on the CF8 (and 7 and 6) code base and it is getting inefficient compare to Railo with new architecture?

BTW I also am running JDK 1.6.14 for ColdFusion 8

2009-07-16T13:00:30.505-04:00

BTW I also am running JDK 1.6.14 for ColdFusion 8

Thank you Paul. Awesome! That's a huge perfor...

2009-07-16T12:52:40.761-04:00

Thank you Paul.

Awesome! That's a huge performance!!!

Interesting for sure. Thanks!

2009-07-16T12:49:32.595-04:00

Interesting for sure. Thanks!

@Ben yes seconds to complete the task then objects...

2009-07-16T12:34:33.848-04:00

@Ben yes seconds to complete the task then objects per second.