"david.lloyd(a)jboss.com" wrote : "remy.maucherat(a)jboss.com" wrote : Actually, I think NIO is pointless. | | I didn't ask, "Who here thinks NIO is pointless". I asked if there were any good benchmarks comparing NIO to APR in terms of performance. | | I've also heard things like "APR is more flexible", but I haven't seen any information to back that up either. I believe the RHM team compared NIO (using Apache MINA) to Apache APR and also to asynchronous IO using direct Linux OS calls (i.e. not going through the APR abstraction layer). I believe the direct hooks gave the best performance, NIO was pretty good, and APR not so good due to the overhead of having to find a common API over all OSs. Sorry for the vaguities, but this is what I remember them mentioning. Don't know if their findings were correct or not. BTW we (JBM) definitely need NIO for handling large number of connections. APR is a "nice to have" if it gives radically better performance than NIO, but I'm not particularly bothered about it. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4067537#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...