One thing I would like to mention is that with our OpenShift first strategy, anything we do should also take into account memory footprint changes.

We are still doing analysis on the memory footprint of EAP, but will have something to publish fairly soon.  

One thing we should avoid here is approaches that allocate memory that won't go away when the boot process is done.

Andy

On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Jason Greene <jason.greene@redhat.com> wrote:

On May 16, 2017, at 7:41 AM, Heiko Braun <hbraun@redhat.com> wrote:


On 16. May 2017, at 13:32, J Pai <jai.forums2013@gmail.com> wrote:

What I have experienced is that for end users, they are mostly interested in seeing their (usually large) deployments show noticeable improvements in deployment time, not necessarily from a cold boot of the server, but when the server is already up and they either want to deploy something new or re-deploy their application.

+1 the deployments increase the time until “ready to perform work”. This is the point we should use as a reference. Anything before (i.e. blank  WF without deployments) is just marketing IMO.

I agree that deployment time is important, but I just want to point out that not all usages of WildFly involve deployments. Examples include proxy servers, static content servers, message brokers, javascript code, transaction managers, and service based applications. 

--
Jason T. Greene
WildFly Lead / JBoss EAP Platform Architect
JBoss, a division of Red Hat


_______________________________________________
wildfly-dev mailing list
wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev



--
Andrig (Andy) T. Miller
Global Platform Director, Middleware
Red Hat, Inc.