Node.js Performance Case Study
Download as KEY, PDF
24 likes12,250 views
This document compares performance of Node.js, Apache + PHP, Manhattan, and Mojito frameworks. Node.js showed superior performance scaling to over 3,000 requests per second with low latency. Manhattan and Mojito also outperformed Apache + PHP in some tests. The document concludes Node.js is well-suited for I/O bound use cases that require handling many concurrent requests quickly and reliably.
Node.js Performance Case Study
- 1. Performance Case Study @Fabian_Frank <fabian@pagefault.de> Yahoo! Search, Engineer Youthmedia.eu,Volunteer
- 6. node v0.4.X multi-core http://developer.yahoo.com/blogs/ydn/posts/2010/07/multicore_http_server_with_nodejs/
- 7. Time Sharing Workers Event Queue
- 8. Event Queue does only one thing at a time events that occur are queued for processing after an event was processed the next one is fetched from the queue
- 9. The difference Workers Event Queue 1. synchronous call 1. asynchronous call that speci鍖es event(s) that can 2. worker blocked occur (callback) 3. periodically check if 2. process next event worker can go ahead 3. speci鍖ed event occurs and 4. call returns is put on the queue 5. worker goes ahead on 4. process goes ahead next check
- 10. Another difference Workers Event Queue 1 connection per N connections per worker process N workers per CPU 1 process (per CPU)
- 11. Regarding... static 鍖le serving benchmarks are not relevant, unless you plan to do heavy duty static 鍖le serving (Im not) hello world benchmarks still ignore most of what matters, e.g. accessing a database or other back-ends
- 12. Realistic Real World Benchmark a lot of variables that have to be controlled more complex, likely to surface weird bugs face unanswerable questions are expensive to do are easy to attack, but hard to defend
- 13. My Reasoning I can not compare everything out there against everything else. But I can compare what I want to use in the future against what I am using today.
- 14. Search Case Study Right Panel retrieved using AJAX { html: <div>...</div>, css: ..., js: ..., ... }
- 15. Refresh Right Panel 1. receive a request JSON API 2. call a JSON API over HTTP 2. 3. manipulate the data structure Node.js 3. 4. 4. render it as HTML using Mustache 1. 5. 5. write back wrapped in JSON Client
- 16. Refresh Right Panel 1. receive a request JSON API 2. call a JSON API over HTTP 2. 3. manipulate the data structure xy 3. ro 4. Node.js P 4. render it as HTML using Mustache 1. 5. 5. write back wrapped in JSON Client
- 17. Constraints Network bandwidth and latency Gigabit and 1ms JSON API performance load-balanced cluster with cache
- 18. Implementations Apache + PHP Node.js (+ YUI) Manhattan + Mojito
- 19. Apache + PHP works, in production for decades initial response times are good enough scales, but you need $$$ baseline to get a feeling for the numbers
- 20. Apache + PHP 430req/s @ 60ms average latency 99% @ 114ms
- 21. Node.js (+ YUI) works, but very new and untested stack initial response times are very low scales extremely well YUI works well, but still has pitfalls
- 22. Node.js Fun Facts >3100 requests per second 100k requests in 32s 9MByte/s network traf鍖c serve >2k req/s at 20ms average latency 99% @ 47ms
- 23. Node.js
- 24. Node.js
- 25. Node.js Histogram ~1500req/s | 25 conc. 12000 99% @ 35ms 10000 8000 frequency 6000 4000 2000 0 11.000 - 17.300 - 23.600 - 29.900 - 36.200 - 42.500 - 48.800 - 55.100 - 61.400 - 67.700 - 74.000 - 17.300 23.600 29.900 36.200 42.500 48.800 55.100 61.400 67.700 74.000 80.300
- 26. Node.js Histogram ~2900/s | 100 conc. 9000 8000 99% @ 79ms 7000 6000 frequency 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 12.000 - 22.000 - 32.000 - 42.000 - 52.000 - 62.000 - 72.000 - 82.000 - 92.000 - 102.000 - 112.000 - 22.000 32.000 42.000 52.000 62.000 72.000 82.000 92.000 102.000 112.000 122.000
- 27. Node.js Histogram ~3100/s | 200 conc. 8000 7000 99% @ 152ms 6000 5000 frequency 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 14.000 - 33.900 - 53.800 - 73.700 - 93.600 - 113.500 - 133.400 - 153.300 - 173.200 - 193.100 - 213.000 - 33.900 53.800 73.700 93.600 113.500 133.400 153.300 173.200 193.100 213.000 232.900
- 28. Manhattan + Mojito works, but extremely new and untested stack initial response times are low (60% compared to Apache/PHP) scales well (twice as good as Apache/PHP)
- 31. Findings Both node.js implementations scale linearly before CPU usage hits 100% Node.js scales extremely well as proxy Manhattan and Mojito can perform better than Apache and PHP (for this use case) Node.js applications are very sensitive to memory leaks or complex/blocking code
- 32. DNS in Node.js getaddrinfo() sys call is synchronous gethostbyname() is, too ares_gethostbyname() is asynchronous no cache node 0.6 uses a getaddrinfo() thread pool, but still relies on ares for other calls
- 34. Manhattan? Yahoo!s Node.js cloud can run any node.js application allows calls to HTTP APIs (e.g.YQL) deployment of versioned apps apps can specify their environment http://developer.yahoo.com/blogs/ydn/posts/2011/11/yahoo-announces-cocktails-%E2%80%93-shaken-not-stirred/
- 35. Mojito? Yahoo!s Node.js MVC framework provides identical similar runtime for your code on the client and server contains all server- and client-side code built on top of YUI will be open sourced http://developer.yahoo.com/blogs/ydn/posts/2011/11/yahoo-announces-cocktails-%E2%80%93-shaken-not-stirred/
- 36. The Cocktails way Mojito Application Mojit Assets Model Client JS Images Controller View CSS ...
- 37. Conclusion Node.js can serve hundreds of concurrent requests quickly and reliable, better than Apache/PHP It scales extremely well for I/O bound use cases It tears down the client-server language barrier, opening new architectural possibilities
- 38. Thank you! Picture: "Esther M端ller" / www.jugendfotos.de, CC-License(by-nc)