2008 IEEE International Conference on Web Services 2008
DOI: 10.1109/icws.2008.71
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance Comparison of Web Service Engines in PHP, Java and C

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0
3

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
9
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Since the TCP/IP workload has no dynamic requests and does not use the PHPFastCGI processes, this result suggests that there is significant sharing of data among Lighttpd processes. Furthermore, since Lighttpd processes are not memory-intensive [23], this workload does not seem to be impacted by the inability of a replica to benefit from the L3 cache of the socket hosting the other replica.…”
Section: Tcp/ip Intensive Workloadmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Since the TCP/IP workload has no dynamic requests and does not use the PHPFastCGI processes, this result suggests that there is significant sharing of data among Lighttpd processes. Furthermore, since Lighttpd processes are not memory-intensive [23], this workload does not seem to be impacted by the inability of a replica to benefit from the L3 cache of the socket hosting the other replica.…”
Section: Tcp/ip Intensive Workloadmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…However, the 2 socket case exposes twice the L3 cache capacity to the Web application processes. This can afford performance gains for the PHP-FastCGI processes, which others have shown to be memory-intensive [23] 1 . In the next section, we study the relative effects of such interactions in the 1 To confirm the memory-intensiveness of PHP-FastCGI processes, we compared the memory access traffic for the Support workload with 8,000 concurrent users to a statistically similar workload where the dynamic requests were replaced by static requests of the same response size.…”
Section: Support Workloadmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ruby supports four paradigms (imperative, object-oriented, reflective and functional). SOAP messaging is supported by PHP since version 5 and provides a good performance that improves its use [3].…”
Section: Programming Languages From the Server Side And Their Pamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[4] mengadakan penelitian yaitu membandingkan PHP, Python, dan Ruby. [5] mengadakan penelitian yang membandingkan kemampuan PHP dengan C dan Java untuk digunakan dalam web service berbasis SOAP.…”
Section: Pendahuluanunclassified