How much more torque MidCOM 3 really gives?

I've been lately done lots of work with MidCOM 3. Currently MidCOM 3 has most of the important things done like basic ACL, templating, authentication and internationalization with gettext.

So how well does it perform? So far there are some optimizations to the web applications code to be made that I'm currently doing. But I still decided to make a little benchmark MidCOM 2.8 (content cache + memcached + bytecodecache) versus MidCOM 3.0 (no cache. Even Midgard page cache is disabled)

I did not have time or a suitable machine available this time to test MidCOM 2.9 with autoloading. So that part remains in the dark at this point.

Both test machine has same CPU power available. Only difference is that MidCOM 3 is run only with 256MB of RAM. Another machine has over 2GB. Both machines have somewhat similar background load.

Results

First in order to make worst possible MidCOM 2.8 run I made several independed requests with ab to get one single page after midcom-cache-invalidate.

Average request time with options ab -c 1 -n 1 done 10 times

MidCOM 2.8: 5.516 seconds
MidCOM 3.0: 0.270 seconds

Results with ab -c 1 -n 10. With this options MidCOM 2.8's caches can truly kick in.

MidCOM 2.8:
Requests per second:    3.28 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request:       305.20 [ms] (mean)

MidCOM 3.0:
Requests per second:    3.59 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request:       278.70 [ms] (mean)

Quite impressive. The page I loaded has 3 dynamic loads. So when MidCOM 3 has its caching engine up and running and some bytecode caching it _is_ going to fly.

The MidCOM 3 itself should not get much more functionality to be run on every request with sufficent planning, implementation and taking leverage of intelligent autoloading.

As the Midgard 2 and MidCOM 3 release comes nearer I'll take more look of the results. So far, looking very good.