Recent
Articles |
Oracle Linux
At "Larry Ellison's Linux nears release", Ashlee Vance is unsure why Oracle would want its own Linux distro. Actually, it makes a lot of sense. It's not the direct revenue of selling the OS with the database...
Make A Linux Home Data Server Of An Old PC
So, you've got an old computer, and you don't know what to do with it. Sure, it can't play new video games, maybe can't run the latest and greatest software...
Linux Flash Player Saga Continues
Adobe's Mike Melanson has posted some more information about the lengthy delays in releasing a new version of Flash Player for Linux. "What could..."
Linux Options Omitted From Vista Survey
It's either the Microsoft way or the highway for computer users according to a survey about the economic impact the Vista operating system could have in Europe. The potential for Linux making an impact...
|
|
|
11.08.06
Performance Profile For Apache Geronimo 1.1.1.
 By Savio Rodrigues
TheServerSide has a thread announcing that the Apache Geronimo team has released a performance profile for Geronimo 1.1.1.
It's a great start and the team should be commended on releasing the results even though it highlights areas where Geronimo performance needs some work, specifically, in the area of pass-by-value EJB primitives.
This gap is being addressed in Geronimo 1.2, so it'll be interesting to see the performance test for 1.2.
One thing to point out: The "Performance Target (PT)" number represents, if I read correctly, the best performance from commercial & OSS alternatives for the given test case.
So, if JBoss performs best at Test A1, then, the PT target for A1 is defined by the JBoss score.
If WebSphere performs best for Test A2, then the PT target for A2 would be defined by the WebSphere score and so on.
This sounds like a much better evaluation for the Geronimo team to determine which areas they need to work on to get to best-in-class performance.
Also, some question the approach of Geronimo being built using OSS components from various communities, vs. bringing all the projects under one roof (with a central control structure…a la what JBoss is trying to do).
This view requires wrestling control of these related projects away from their individual communities, or the Geronimo community re-implementing code to replace the components from these related projects.
Both alternatives go against the modus operandi (i.e. peace & reuse) of true open source communities.
And hey, developing OSS components in separate, but related, communities seems to have worked out okay for Linux :-)
About the Author:
A.P. Lawrence provides SCO Unix and Linux consulting services http://www.pcunix.com
|
