Wednesday, September 17th, 2008
Aptana Jaxer Benchmarks
Category: Aptana
We wanted to answer a simple question: how does Jaxer, with its server-side DOM and JavaScript, perform relative to these other popular alternatives?
This was not designed to be an all-encompassing shoot-out, or a detailed study of everything you might want to do in a web app. Instead, we took a few common tasks — making database requests, using JSON, etc. — and implemented them as you might expect in the three platforms. We made enough DB requests and JSON calls and so on to give us a reasonable number of milliseconds to measure. But we also wanted to make the repetitions representative of what you might find on somewhat intensive real-world page, so we’re not making a million DB requests, just a hundred, for instance. And we included one benchmark of serving an almost-static page: the “almost” was to make sure we were measuring the time the platform took to really read through the page, in case it had dynamic content in it. (Otherwise, if the page were truly static, you could always arrange for the web server to serve it without involving the platform.)
The tests include page scraping tests (e.g. mashup work), database performance, file I/O, JSON, and programatical loops.
Related Content:
Wow, that’s pretty interesting, and not just from the stand point of Jaxer, but looking at the performances of PHP and Rails too. It would be interesting to see if the developers involved in each of these take a look the results and see how they can improve.
PHP vs Rails is kind of a misnomer, you’re comparing a language and a framework. Jaxer sounds fairly neat though.
@Adam Sanderson: It’s maybe an awkward set of contenders, but it’s *realistic*. The number of web apps built in Ruby that are not using Rails is… quite small.
Cant wait to see the results when jaxer uses tracemonkey :)