We've done some performance testing pre-M1 but nothing recent so nothing va=
lid. That will be a major goal of M4 is to make SpecJ happy. Pure numbers=
benchmarks are irrelevant because it is highly dependent on DB used, size =
of mails, hardware and network. So the numbers are never particularly good=
unless all variables except one are equivilent. Needless to say, public b=
enchmarking doesn't work that way. Since we may work with the James guys i=
n some areas, its unlikely I'll publish competitive to JAMES benchmarks jus=
t to antagonize them. It will come down to: if you want an apache style pr=
oject with apache style support and you like or don't dislike JAMES's appro=
ach, use JAMES. If you want the "professional open source" style support, =
like or dont' dislike our approach, use JBMS. Likely we'll make ease of in=
stallation and ease of management a core advantage as well (not sure if the=
y're working on it). In the end performance will be a matter of what you'r=
e able to achieve with a capital vs hardware. We aim high and I think we'l=
l beat Exchange and Domino easily in this area (read: they're really slow a=
nd bloated). when finished, I suspect we'll beat postfix in this area (cop=
ies stuff around alot). We may beat others in some scenarios but its possi=
ble that a db backed mail server can't play as amusingly well in benchmarks=
as a file backed one (even if the db backed one scales up better). Not to=
say we can't create "fun for benchmarks" configs but frankly it won't be s=
omething I spend any time on (only real world). =20
However, JAMES and JBMS currently have a major bottleneck: JavaMail sucks. =
We'll need to address this. I approached JAMES on collaboration here but =
most folks seemed disinterested in that part. If that is the case we'll li=
kely create a LGPL reimpelmentation once we're further along. At that poin=
t JAMES will have to reimplement as well or be left in the dust at least wh=
en running in a DB backed mode with high concurrency.=20
-Andy
View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=3Dbb&op=3Dv=
iewtopic&p=3D3886474#3886474
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=3Dbb&op=3Dpostin=
g&mode=3Dreply&p=3D3886474
|
