https://github.com/gonwan/toys/blob/master/webframework-benchmark/readme.md
See Techempower. This repository contains homemade java benchmarks using spring-mvc, spring-webflux and netty-http/netty-tcp servers based on reactor-netty. gin and gnet are also included. wrk is used as client. gobench is also considered but it is not so good as wrk.
|
1 2 |
# benchmarking plaintext # ./wrk -c 1000 -t 30 -d 30s http://10.xx.xx.xx:8124/text |
Environment 1
- Server: 8C16G vm
- Client: 4C8G vm * 2
| Server | Server Throughput | Server CPU |
|---|---|---|
| spring-mvc | 25k ~ 30k /s | ~600% |
| spring-webflux | 90k ~ 110k /s | ~780% |
| go-gin | 110k ~ 120k /s | ~600% |
| go-gnet | 110k ~ 120k /s | ~270% |
| netty-http | 110k ~ 120k /s | ~480% |
| netty-tcp | 110k ~ 120k /s | ~360% |
2 VM Clients are not able to fully utilize the server capability. The initial attempts were benchmarking only first 4 cases. And the go-gnet results made me wonder, it can give much more throughput. After reading the source of it, I found go-gnet case is actually a TCP server with very very little of HTTP implementation to fulfill the benchmark, which is unfair for other cases. Therefore, I added case 5/6 in java to align with it.
Environment 2
- Server: 24C32G physical machine
- Client:
- 4C8G vm * 2
- 8C16G vm * 1
- 24C32G physical machine * 1
| Server | Server Throughput | Server CPU |
|---|---|---|
| spring-mvc | ~120k /s | ~1560% |
| spring-webflux | ~180k /s | ~2380% |
| go-gin | ~380k /s | ~2350% |
| go-gnet | 560k ~ 580k /s | ~1160% |
| netty-http | 560k ~ 580k /s | ~2350% |
| netty-tcp | 560k ~ 580k /s | ~1460% |
Still room to give more throughput in go-gnet and netty-tcp cases. Not having so many idle systems for benchmarking now. The throughput should have a linear increment when more CPU is utilized, in both cases.
As a developer, spring-mvc or go-gin can still be the first choice, as they are easier to get started.