× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.


  • Subject: RE: Websphere: a resource hog?
  • From: "Stone, Brad V (TC)" <bvstone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:11:28 -0500

You got a URL I can hit with my load testing stuff, Joe?  I'd like to
compare it to the results I did with native CGI a few months ago.  Both
static and dynamic pages would work best for good results.

Brad

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Pluta [mailto:joepluta@PlutaBrothers.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 9:26 AM
> To: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> Subject: RE: Websphere: a resource hog?
> 
> 
> Contrary to Brad's results, I've been benchmarking WebSphere 
> on a base model
> 270 (a 9406-270 2250 w/1GB RAM and 32GB disk) and it will run 100
> simultaneous sessions generating 2KB of HTML each with a 
> response time of
> 1.2 secs.  This comes out to about 5000 hits per minute, or 
> 300,000 hits per
> hour.
> 
> Of course, that's basically just measuring WebSphere's capability to
> generate and output HTML.  Using the Java toolbox, a simple 
> application
> building an 8KB page from a disk file will run 5 sessions at 
> once with a 1.3
> seconds response time.  That's 230 hits per minute, or over 
> 12,000 per hour.
> 
> And the CPU only hits 50% on that particular benchmark, 
> probably because of
> all the disk wait time.  I'm going to do some more benchmarks 
> using data
> queues and a batch RPG server.  I suspect that will have even more
> impressive numbers.
> 
> If written correctly, WebSphere applications scream.  If 
> written poorly,
> they dog.
> 
> Also in stark contrast to Brad's situation, on my little model 270,
> adminclient takes 8 seconds to stop a server instance, and 26 
> seconds to
> bring it back up.  Actually stopping the QEJB subsystem and 
> bringing it back
> up takes a bit more time (as in five minutes), but I've only 
> had to do that
> three times in the last two months, and I do heavy WebSphere 
> development for
> multiple clients, as well as benchmarking.
> 
> Joe
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-midrange-l@midrange.com
> > [mailto:owner-midrange-l@midrange.com]On Behalf Of Stone, 
> Brad V (TC)
> > Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 7:04 AM
> > To: 'MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com'
> > Subject: RE: Websphere: a resource hog?
> >
> >
> > I also run websphere on a 720, but it is a hog.  Needless to say
> > I don't use
> > it for prodcution.  Maybe that's where the higher CPW
> > requirements come in.
> > It runs great with one or two hits (ie playing/testing), 
> but if its a full
> > blown e-commerce site getting hundreds of hits a minute (or 
> more), then I
> > could see why you'd need all the CPW and loads of memory.
> >
> > Brad
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Joe Pluta [mailto:joepluta@PlutaBrothers.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 5:26 PM
> > > To: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> > > Subject: RE: Websphere: a resource hog?
> > >
> > >
> > > Dennis, I run plenty of WebSphere software on my machine,
> > > which is a 370CPW
> > > model 270 (with 0CPW interactive).  I don't see why you would
> > > need 950CPW,
> > > unless you are using WebSphere Advanced Edition.  You should
> > > not need the
> > > Advanced Edition unless you require EJB support, and most
> > > applications do
> > > not require EJBs.
> > >
> > > Joe
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: owner-midrange-l@midrange.com
> > > > [mailto:owner-midrange-l@midrange.com]On Behalf Of 
> Denis Robitaille
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 4:39 PM
> > > > To: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> > > > Subject: Websphere: a resource hog?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hello all,
> > > >
> > > > We are currently working on an Ebusiness project. We want to use
> > > > an AS/400 with websphere. I am amazed by the power that this
> > > > software requires. The minimum requirement calls for over 950
> > > > CPW!!! I mean, we have over 40 AS/400 and none of them requires
> > > > that much power. I also know that we can run webshere on an NT
> > > > box and the required configuration is much less (and would cost
> > > > about 75% less ALL included).
> > > >
> > > > Does somebody knows why this is so?
> > > >
> > > > My first tought would be that this is a badly written 
> software to
> > > > require so much power to operate. Or is that du to the
> > > > architecture of the Iseries?
> > > >
> > > > Denis Robitaille
> > > > Directeur services techniques
> > > > Cascades Inc
> > > > 819 363 5187
> > > > fax 819 363 5177
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > +---
> > > > | This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
> > > > | To submit a new message, send your mail to
> > > MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
> > > > | To subscribe to this list send email to
> > > MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> > > > | To unsubscribe from this list send email to
> > > > MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> > > > | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator:
> > > > david@midrange.com
> > > > +---
> > > >
> > >
> > > +---
> > > | This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
> > > | To submit a new message, send your mail to 
> MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
> > > | To subscribe to this list send email to 
> MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> > > | To unsubscribe from this list send email to
> > > MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> > > | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator:
> > > david@midrange.com
> > > +---
> > >
> > +---
> > | This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
> > | To submit a new message, send your mail to 
> MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
> > | To subscribe to this list send email to 
> MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> > | To unsubscribe from this list send email to
> > MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> > | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator:
> > david@midrange.com
> > +---
> >
> 
> +---
> | This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
> | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to 
> MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: 
> david@midrange.com
> +---
> 
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.