[jboss-dev-forums] [Design of JBoss Remoting, Unified Invokers] - Re: Why bother with APR?

[trustin]

"timfox" wrote : 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.

Is there any written report related with their findings?

I am with Tim in that APR is a nice-to-have.  Some platform's NIO performance might not be better than APR and vice versa, so it would be nice if users can choose what the best is for their running platform.

View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4085841#4085841

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4085841