On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 3:46 PM Rémy Maucherat <r...@apache.org> wrote: > Ok, that is reasonable and seeing what can be expected in the best > case is a good plan. Async will indeed be a bit more expensive with > Loom, just like blocking is more expensive with NIO(2).
I'm starting testing, and it looks like the basics work, as you said. The first item is to identify a best case scenario for Loom. I decided to try with a static file (in the context of Tomcat, a low level API would be very similar in terms of IO), but maybe this is not it and a Servlet doing computations would be better for Loom (with less IO load). Pulling out my good old ab, I have some rather interesting results. -c 1 (no concurrency) is looking awesome for Loom, where it basically destroys NIO. However, it degrades quickly from there. -c 2 is already a lot closer. -c 5 is the inflexion point where NIO pulls ahead. Then as concurrency increases Loom becomes slower. Thankfully, it doesn't degrade too much from there and with high concurrency it remains reasonably close. I don't have a high core count CPU though so this could make for some differences as well. Overall I would say this matches your finding. I tested with my panama-foreign Java "20" build. We should probably wait for the real Java 20 to start making decisions. Rémy --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
