It's true.
We use Jasper Reports quite heavily and a 5 page document that takes
30-60+ seconds when running Jasper natively takes 1-3 seconds when we
job it out to a PC. And that includes file transfer time back to the
IFS when done on the Windows server.
Oh, and the iSeries is doing nothing else so this would match up to an
idle Windows box.
Some Java stuff performs pretty well, but tools like Jasper don't and
therefore we offload them to a Windows server for processing using the
exact same Java code.
This bodes well for write-once, run everywhere, but not for the native
iSeries java performance.
I have tested with 64-bit and 32-bit on V5R4.
Now I haven't tested V6R1 yet, but I'm not anticipating stellar
improvements.
Regards,
Richard Schoen
RJS Software Systems Inc.
"Get the information you need. Now!"
Document Management, Workflow, Report Delivery, Forms and Business
Intelligence
Email: richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Web Site:
http://www.rjssoftware.com
Tel: (952) 736-5800
Fax: (952) 736-5801
Toll Free: (888) RJSSOFT
-----Original Message-----
------------------------------
message: 6
date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 08:29:56 -0700 (PDT)
from: Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx>
subject: Re: Native sFTP?
From: Richard Schoen
Since you wrote the redbook on Java for the iSeries, could you
tell me how to speed it up to the levels that it runs on Windows?
Is that really true? Or is it just a false perception carried over from
the days when shops tried to run Java on older, constrained AS/400
models?
Or could it be a false perception resulting from running complex
workloads under IBM i vs. simple workloads under Windows? I still see
that in most environments today, where IBM i is running complex
interactive and batch workloads, while Wintel servers are pretty much
dedicated to a single task - application serving or database serving.
My perception is that given a comparable CPU & memory configuration, and
workload configurations, Java performance is about the same under both
platforms.
Like Simon, it puzzles and concerns me to continue seeing workloads
moving away from the IBM i native virtual machine. I'd personally like
to see IBM and other vendors investing more in the native environment.
A native sFTP would be a good candidate for IBM to bundle with IBM i.
It would be hard for any other vendor to generate a separate revenue
stream from it.
I developed quite a bit of plumbing and infrastructure for native IBM i
Web applications, but there are a lot of barriers to marketing that type
of product, so I've since moved on to developing business applications.
Still I'm glad that I invested in native IBM i plumbing and framework
code, because it provides a great basis for business applications.
Nathan.
midrange.com
