Re: Why does node's Toolkit for i, use a database connection to execute CL commands?

Nathan

V8 compiles <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-in-time_compilation>
JavaScript <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaScript> to native machine code
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_code> (IA-32
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IA-32>, x86-64
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64>, ARM
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture>, PowerPC
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerPC>,IBM s390
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_ESA/390> or MIPS
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIPS_architecture> ISAs
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instruction_set_architecture>)[3]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V8_(JavaScript_engine)#cite_note-google_dev-3>
[6] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V8_(JavaScript_engine)#cite_note-6> before
executing it, instead of more traditional techniques such as interpreting
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpreter_(computing)> bytecode or
compiling the whole program to machine code and executing it from a
filesystem. The compiled code is additionally optimized (and re-optimized)
dynamically at runtime, based on heuristics of the code's execution
profile. Optimization techniques used includeinlining
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inlining>, elision
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copy_elision> of expensive runtime
properties, and inline caching
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inline_caching>, among many others.

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Henrik Rützou <hr@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Nathan

Node.js doesn't run on ineterpretive language (javascript). That's the
core of
the efficiency of Google V8 Javascript Machine - it compiles the code!

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

I am curious whether or not node scales more efficiently than the .NET
Provider in terms of concurrent users... I'm just curious which handles
concurrent users more efficiently in terms of CPU%.

All mainstream web application architectures scale by adding more cores
and
memory and distributing (load balancing) "requests" across pools of
application server instances, and occasionally across pools of virtual
machine instances.

You're smart to ask about CPU efficiency, IMHO. And the other concern is
how much additional time system administrators will need to allocate to
"managing" distributed computing architectures.

Regarding CPU efficiency, you should have a wake-up call if you add 5250
replacement to the comparison. Any of the web application interfaces we've
mentioned in this thread (Java, PHP, Python, Ruby, Node.js, MS .Net) will
increase CPU usage by at least 3,000% over comparable 5250 interfaces.

5250 interfaces that consume 3 milliseconds of CPU time will consume a
minimum of 90 milliseconds after being converted to use a browser user
interface. Web interfaces often consume 200-300 milliseconds of CPU time
to
generate "an HTML page".

The question of comparing CPU efficiency of Node.js vs. MS .Net is hard
due
of the lack of benchmarks. Anecdotal evidence suggests that interpretive
scripting environments will consume several times more CPU than compiled
applications. But that could be ameliorated by reducing the amount of
"work" performed by Node.js or MS .Net by moving it to run in the IBM i
native environment.

Mike Pavlak of Zend has a story about a customer which was using
XMLSERVICE
to run the ADDLIBLE command from PHP and complained about the performance.
Rather than "evoke" the "toolkit" for each library in the library list,
Mike suggested calling a CL program once to "add" all the needed
libraries.
That fixed the performance problem.
--
This is the Web Enabling the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) (WEB400) mailing
list
To post a message email: WEB400@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400
or email: WEB400-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/web400.

--
Regards,
Henrik Rützou

http://powerEXT.com <http://powerext.com/>