[Zope] Surprising load test results? (more results)

Pascal Peregrina Pperegrina at Lastminute.com
Tue Oct 10 05:44:11 EDT 2006

Well, I should have removed the SpeedPack results for clarity...
I might add these graphs today.

But basically, the worrying thing is the performance degradation with each
zope version... 2.8.8 seems to be the fastest, then 2.9, then 2.10... :(
(even if you forget about WSGI)


> De : Lennart Regebro <regebro at gmail.com>
> Date : Mon, 9 Oct 2006 21:46:39 +0200
> À : Pascal Peregrina <Pperegrina at lastminute.com>
> Cc : "zope at zope.org" <zope at zope.org>
> Objet : Re: [Zope] Surprising load test results? (more results)
> On 10/9/06, Pascal Peregrina <Pperegrina at lastminute.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I have added "ab" tests at the end of the page.
>> (http://talk.lastminute.com/wiki/index.php/Loadtest)
>> These extra results confirm everything we had found so far, except for 2.10
>> with use-wsgi "on"... We could see what others reported: in 2.10, WSGI adds
>> a similar overhead to all type of requests (html, gif, swf, ...). So there
>> must have been something wrong in our initial test.
>> Again, Zope 2.8.8 remains the fastest version...
>> Something new that we could not see in the previous test is the evolution of
>> the results with the number of concurrent threads, as we have done the same
>> test with 1,2,5,10,20,50 and 100 threads.
> Well, as seen here the number of requests peak at around five threads,
> which is expected with Zopes default setting of four threads.
>> Please have a look, and let me know what you think about these additional
>> results.
> They seem to largely contractictyour earlier results, where the
> avergare response time for WSGI was similar for all document types.
> Now they are not. Also, this time, 2.10 without WSGI ends up somewhere
> between 2.9 and 2.10 with WSGI, while before 2.10 without WSGI was
> slightly slower (but not that much) than 2.9.
> So, basically, these tests are perhaps slightly less non-sensical than
> your earlier tests, but still surprising. I don't see why Zope 2.10
> would be so much slower than 2.9 in serving static content. There has
> been no change there. Your first test was much more reasonable in that
> area. This test is on the otehr hand much more reasonable for the WSGI
> results.
> -- 
> Lennart Regebro, Nuxeo     http://www.nuxeo.com/
> CPS Content Management     http://www.nuxeo.org/

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.


More information about the Zope mailing list