<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Resin vs. Tomcat simple performance comparison</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.caucho.com/2008/05/16/resin-vs-tomcat-simple-performance-comparison/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.caucho.com/2008/05/16/resin-vs-tomcat-simple-performance-comparison/</link>
	<description>Inside info, thoughts, and opinions from Caucho engineers</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 15:17:51 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: echofloripa</title>
		<link>http://blog.caucho.com/2008/05/16/resin-vs-tomcat-simple-performance-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-5</link>
		<dc:creator>echofloripa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2008 16:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.caucho.com/?p=31#comment-5</guid>
		<description>I did another test, using tomcat 5.5.4 and resin 3.0.14, which are the resin version we use in my company. We decided to go from tomcat after the change licensing change that resin is going through.

I'm running from 1-150 concurrent users, simulating our website under load.
I left also tomcat serving 290.000 requests overnight, without any error.

On the comparison from 1-150 users, tomcat was always slightly faster. Another important point is that resin consume quite a lot more of CPU than tomcat.

I changed tomcat default memory to the same we use in resin, otherwise it wouldn't be fair.
They both are using the following configuration:
-Xms200M -Xmx1024M -Xmx1024M -Xss1m</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I did another test, using tomcat 5.5.4 and resin 3.0.14, which are the resin version we use in my company. We decided to go from tomcat after the change licensing change that resin is going through.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m running from 1-150 concurrent users, simulating our website under load.<br />
I left also tomcat serving 290.000 requests overnight, without any error.</p>
<p>On the comparison from 1-150 users, tomcat was always slightly faster. Another important point is that resin consume quite a lot more of CPU than tomcat.</p>
<p>I changed tomcat default memory to the same we use in resin, otherwise it wouldn&#8217;t be fair.<br />
They both are using the following configuration:<br />
-Xms200M -Xmx1024M -Xmx1024M -Xss1m</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: teodorbaciu</title>
		<link>http://blog.caucho.com/2008/05/16/resin-vs-tomcat-simple-performance-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>teodorbaciu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 19:55:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.caucho.com/?p=31#comment-4</guid>
		<description>Hi,

I also did a performance comparison between Tomcat and Resin and Tomcat died because of OutOfMemory errors. I tested tomcat with different JDKs and here are the results:

Tomcat 5.5 + Sun JDK 1.6 update 4   --- served 25613 requests
Tomcat 5.5 + Bea Jrockit 6 update 3 --- served 519635 requests
Resin 3.0 + Bea Jrockit 6 update 3 --- more 800000 and was still going strong !!! Memory consumption was stable at 94 MB.

You guys really need to start promoting your product because the Java community needs to know those performance facts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,</p>
<p>I also did a performance comparison between Tomcat and Resin and Tomcat died because of OutOfMemory errors. I tested tomcat with different JDKs and here are the results:</p>
<p>Tomcat 5.5 + Sun JDK 1.6 update 4   &#8212; served 25613 requests<br />
Tomcat 5.5 + Bea Jrockit 6 update 3 &#8212; served 519635 requests<br />
Resin 3.0 + Bea Jrockit 6 update 3 &#8212; more 800000 and was still going strong !!! Memory consumption was stable at 94 MB.</p>
<p>You guys really need to start promoting your product because the Java community needs to know those performance facts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
