Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Post Tudbc, post: 4625229"] I notice that you use the best of 5 runs to report numbers, which I think it is going to vary a lot. You can use my free tool to do web benchmarking, which I think is much more accurate. [URL]http://www.tudbc.org/tudbcwebbenchmark[/URL] I think your Machine is about same as my old test machine. Here are some numbers: Using "Echo" test: (copied from [URL]http://www.tudbc.org/jrubywebapp[/URL]) 0.98ms TudbcJRubyServlet_RB 1.73ms Thin 4.04ms Mongrel (estimated, because Mongrel crashed in the middle) 8.51ms WEBrick Using your "time now+version" test: 1.11ms TudbcJRubyServlet_RB 1.56ms Thin 4.00ms Mongrel (estimated, because Mongrel crashed in the middle) 8.18ms WEBrick As you can see in your "time now" test on your machine, your Mongrel results were probably inaccurate, because you used the "best of 5" to measure. Both my "Echo" and your "Time now+version" tests seem to produce similar benchmarks. As you can see, TudbcJRubyServlet_RB still win easily, and Thin is faster than Mongrel by a wide margin. Note: The default measurement of TudbcWebBenchmark is average of last 10 of 20 runs (with each run for 10 seconds). Because Mongrel crashed, so I only estimate it by 3rd run of 5 seconds each. Note: Ruby version used: JRuby 1.1.5 and Ruby 1.8.7-p72 on Windows [/QUOTE]