Re: CGI vs JSP...

That's about the same (30x) performance difference between
my eRPG SDK and CGIDEV2 once we're up to 10,000 iterations
(single unique replacements on each iteration, basically a
counter).  Your test would be closer to 30,000
replacements/iterations.

http://www.bvstools.com/erpgsdk/graph.html

The graph represented here was duplicated on a 570
partition, but the iterations needed to be greatly
increased over that on the 170.  :)  The curve was the
same, though.

Of course, even with all this a more realistic speed test,
and which would barely be noticable, would be about 10
replacements with 30 rows of data.  

Brad

On Tue, 16 May 2006 14:20:21 -0400
 "Seth Newton" <snewton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Brad,
> 
> RPGsp is smart enough to detect when only the HTML is
> changed, in which case
> it saves off the HTML, and does not recompile the RPG
> code.
> 
> I ran some performance tests on RPGsp vs. CGIDEV2 and the
> results were
> astounding.
> 
> My example displayed 1000 rows of dynamic data.  Each row
> had 30
> substitution variables.  I basically used the same HTML
> and RPG code in both
> tools.  I displayed a timestamp at the top and bottom of
> the page.
> 
> RPGsp consistently displayed the information in 0.2 to
> 0.3 seconds.
> 
> CGIDEV2 was consistently between 8 and 10 seconds, about
> 30 times slower.
> 
> By the way, I ran this on a 520 500 CPW machine, and I
> did turn debugging
> off in CGIDEV2.  I am convinced now more than ever that
> RPG CGI is faster
> than Java and any studies that show otherwise are based
> on specific tools
> that may not implement CGI efficiently.
> 
> Seth Newton
> snewton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Profound Logic Software, Inc.
> Toll-Free: (877) 224-7768 x115
> Fax: (603) 849-7757
> 
> RPGsp - iSeries Web Development has never been this easy!
> Watch video demos:
> http://www.profoundlogic.com/video_demos/
> 
> 
> ------ Original Message ------
> 
> So if the template changes, that means a recompile
> though, right?  Now, I
> know that a recompile shouldn't be a "big deal", but I
> know one of the nice
> things about CGIDEV2 or other packages is that you don't
> have to recompile,
> just change the template.  Sometimes that feature
> outweighs the milliseconds
> one may save.  I used to say "who cares if I recompile",
> but once I found I
> didn't have to, it was something I almost couldn't live
> without.
> 
> But, I would be curious as to some speed tests as well.
>  Theoretically RPGSPs can't be faster than raw CGI unless
> they use something
> else in the background.  
> 
> The only reason I ask is, with my tests, on newer
> machines I haven't seen a
> noticable difference between CGIDEV2, eRPG SDK or raw
> RPG-CGI.  The
> bottleneck is the HTTP server (or the QtmhWrStout API)
> not being able to
> spit out the data fast enough, and/or the network.
> 
> AS an example, I ran some tests on eRPG SDK vs CGIDEV2 on
> a VLP machine from
> IBM (a 570 partition I think).  Well, I couldn't get the
> execution of either
> to be more than a second until I went up to 50,000
> iterations.  Even then
> while the app took a second to run, it probably took my
> browser 30 seconds
> to load the data.
> 
> Brad
> 
> -- 
> This is the Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries (WEB400)
> mailing list
> To post a message email: WEB400@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400
> or email: WEB400-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the
> archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/web400.
> 

Bradley V. Stone
BVS.Tools
www.bvstools.com