performance-comparison | test goal is to show the difference | Unit Testing library
kandi X-RAY | performance-comparison Summary
kandi X-RAY | performance-comparison Summary
This test goal is to show the difference between synchronous and asynchronous interaction
Support
Quality
Security
License
Reuse
Top functions reviewed by kandi - BETA
- Create queue .
- Configure the container .
- Register bundles .
- Configure the routes .
- Load service services .
- Get the cache directory .
- Dispatch a message .
performance-comparison Key Features
performance-comparison Examples and Code Snippets
Community Discussions
Trending Discussions on performance-comparison
QUESTION
What processor is Microsoft App Service V1 running on?
V2 seems to be running on Dv2-series VMs:
"The new Premium V2 tier features Dv2-series VMs with even faster processors, SSD storage, and double the memory-to-core ratio compared to the previous compute iteration." https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/azure-app-service-premium-v2-in-public-preview/
However, what is the corresponding VM, CPU or performance of the previous compute iteration? What would (roughly) be the CPU performance difference between P1 and P1V2 (or for example between a 4-core P3 and a 2-core P2V2)?
Edit According to this article - https://cloudspectator.com/microsoft-azure-dv2-vs-ds-comparison/ - Dv2 would be roughly 35% faster than Dv1 which would be roughly 60% faster than A (https://cloudspectator.com/wp-content/uploads/report/generational-performance-comparison-microsoft-azures-a-series-and-d-series.pdf) which is used in the V1 app services as stated in the accepted answer
...ANSWER
Answered 2017-Sep-25 at 22:44Basic, Standard and Premium V1(including V1 App Service Environments) run on A series VM's.
Premium V2 and Isolated Sku(App Servicement Environment V2) run on Dv2 series machines.
QUESTION
I have a Spark DataFrame
where all fields are integer type. I need to count how many individual cells are greater than 0.
I am running locally and have a DataFrame
with 17,000 rows and 450 columns.
I have tried two methods, both yielding slow results:
Version 1:
...ANSWER
Answered 2018-Jul-14 at 06:56What to do
QUESTION
Usage: In our production we have around 100 thread which can access the cache we are trying to implement. If cache is missed then information will be fetched from the database and cache will be updated via writer thread.
To achieve this we are planning to implement multiple read and single writer
We cannot update the g++ version since we are using g++-4.4
Update: Each worker thread can work for both read and write. If cache is missed then information is cached from the DB.
Problem Statement: We need to implement the cache to enhance the performance. For this, cache read are more frequent and write operations to the cache is very much less.
I think we can use boost::shared_mutex boost::shared_lock
, boost::upgrade_lock
, boost::upgrade_to_unique_lock implementation
But we learnt that boost::shared_mutex
has performance issues:
Questions
- Does
boost::shared_mutex
impact the performance in case read are much frequent? - What are other constructs and design approaches we can take while considering compiler version
g++4.4
? - Is there a way-around on how to design it, such that
reads are lock free
?
Also, we are intended to use Map
to keep the information for cache.
ANSWER
Answered 2018-Feb-02 at 09:08You need to profile it.
In case you're stuck because you don't have a "similar enough" environment where you can actually test things, you can probably write a simple wrapper using pthreads: pthread_rwlock_t
- pthread_rwlock_rdlock
- pthread_rwlock_wrlock
- pthread_rwlock_unlock
Of course you can design things to be lock free. Most obvious solution would be to not share state. (If you do share state, you'll have to check that your target platform supports atomic instructions). However, without any knowledge of your application domain, I feel very safe suggesting you do not want lock-free. See e.g. Do lock-free algorithms really perform better than their lock-full counterparts?
QUESTION
I've always used C# interfaces to achieve inversion of control. But then I found this article which compares a bunch of IoC containers. What is the difference between these containers and a C# interface?
http://www.palmmedia.de/blog/2011/8/30/ioc-container-benchmark-performance-comparison
...ANSWER
Answered 2017-Oct-01 at 06:49You make a false comparison. Abstractions are a prerequisite to apply Dependency Injection and to conform to the Dependency Inversion Principle. If you are applying DI without the help of a container, you are practicing Pure DI. Pure DI is a valid practice.
When an application grows, the use of containers can become very convenient, because they enable Convention over Configuration to wire object graphs. If you start using a DI container, you still need to use Abstractions.
To learn more on when and why you should use a DI container, read this and this.
QUESTION
I have a server talking to a mobile app, and this app potentially does thousands of requests per day. I don't care that much about performance in this particular case, so saving some miliseconds isn't as big as a concern as saving bandwidth - especially since I'm paying for it.
(1) What is the advantage of using JSON over binary here, when bandwidth is a much bigger deal than performance? I mean, I have read some people saying that the size difference between raw data and JSON isn't really that much - and that might as well be partially true, but when you have thousands of daily requests being made by hundreds of thousands of users, merely doubling the amount of bytes will have a huge impact on bandwidth usage - and in the end, on the server bill.
Also, some people said that you can easily alter the JSON output format, while changing the binary serialization might be a little more complicated. Again, I agree, but shouldn't it be a little more complicated than that? Like, what are the odds that we're gonna change our format? Will the ease of change make up for JSON's bandwidth excess?
(2) And finally, I stumbled upon this link while doing some research on this topic, and in the summary table (Ctrl + F, 'summary') it says that the JSON data size is smaller than the actual binary data? How is that even possible?
I would very much appreciate some answers to these questions.
Thank you in advance.
...ANSWER
Answered 2017-Mar-07 at 22:17thousands of requests per day
that's ... not really a lot, so most approaches will usually be fine
What is the advantage of using JSON over binary here, when bandwidth is a much bigger deal than performance?
JSON wouldn't usually have an advantage; usually that would go to binary protocols - things like protobuf; however, compression may be more significant than choice of protocol. If you want meaningful answers, however, the only way to get that is to test it with your data.
If bandwidth is your key concern, I'd go with protobuf, adding compression on top if you have a lot of text data in your content (text compresses beautifully, and protobuf simply uses UTF8, so it is still available for compression).
it says that the JSON data size is smaller than the actual binary data?
JSON contains textual field names, punctuation ("
, :
, ,
), etc - and all values are textual rather than primitive; JSON will be larger than good binary serializers. The article, however, compares to BinaryFormatter
; BinaryFormatter
does not qualify as a good binary serializer IMO. It is easy to use and works without needing to do anything. If you compare against something like protobuf: protobuf will beat JSON every time. And sure enough, if we look at the table: JSON is 102 or 86 bytes (depending on the serializer); protobuf-net is 62 bytes, MsgPack is 61, BinaryFormatter
is 669. Do not conflate "a binary serializer" with BinaryFormatter
. I blame the article for this error, not you. MsgPack and Protocol Buffers (protobuf-net) are binary serializers, and they come out in the lead.
(disclosure: I'm the author of protobuf-net)
QUESTION
I was using Symfony3 with PHP7 and want to explore Ruby and Ruby on Rails. My first impression was "wow
".
I won't asking PHP7 vs Ruby. This is not related to that. What I am asking was stated here:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ruby-vs-php-python-simple-microservice-performance-comparison-per
Not only it's outperforming both Ruby and Python based solution it was only engine that passed 500 concurrent connections test without failing any request.
Is that true? Is Ruby or Python (but in my case only Ruby on Rails) really fails on such amount of requests?
How can I do to prevent? How does GitHub doesn't fail while they are using Rails or GitLab for instance?
Are there any other way to start RoR server for better performance?
I am building an app that will be higher usages and thinking to move from symfony3/PHP to Ruby. Am I doing wrong?
I am stuck at this point. Can't go further without knowing or understanding this subject better.
...ANSWER
Answered 2017-Jan-12 at 22:52Shopify is Rails 5, and ...
... has been benchmarked to process over 25,000 requests per second
https://engineering.shopify.com/116502404-five-shopify-talks-at-railsconf-2016
Community Discussions, Code Snippets contain sources that include Stack Exchange Network
Vulnerabilities
No vulnerabilities reported
Install performance-comparison
PHP requires the Visual C runtime (CRT). The Microsoft Visual C++ Redistributable for Visual Studio 2019 is suitable for all these PHP versions, see visualstudio.microsoft.com. You MUST download the x86 CRT for PHP x86 builds and the x64 CRT for PHP x64 builds. The CRT installer supports the /quiet and /norestart command-line switches, so you can also script it.
Support
Reuse Trending Solutions
Find, review, and download reusable Libraries, Code Snippets, Cloud APIs from over 650 million Knowledge Items
Find more librariesStay Updated
Subscribe to our newsletter for trending solutions and developer bootcamps
Share this Page