<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!--
 Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
 or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
 distributed with this work for additional information
 regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file
 to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
 "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
 with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at

   http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0

 Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
 software distributed under the License is distributed on an
 "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
 KIND, either express or implied.  See the License for the
 specific language governing permissions and limitations
 under the License.
-->

<document>
	<properties>
		<title>JCS vs EHCache Performance</title>
		<author email="asmuts@apache.org">Aaron Smuts</author>
	</properties>

	<body>
		<section name="JCS vs EHCache Memory Performance">
			<subsection name="Initial Test Results">
				<p>
					I just built both EHCache (1.2-beta4) and JCS
					(1.2.7.0) from head, configured both similarly and
					ran 20 rounds of 50,000 puts and gets, that is
					1,000,000 puts and gets in total. Using the default
					LRU Memory Cache, the same algorithm that EHCache
					uses by default,
					<b>
						JCS proved to be nearly twice as fast as EHCache
					</b>
					in multiple trials for both puts and gets. I have
					the log levels for both set at info. I would like to
					further verify my results, since they completely
					contradict the information on the EHCache site.
				</p>
				<p>
					From what I can tell so far, JCS is significantly
					faster than EHCache when you are retrieving items
					that exist in the cache and when you are putting
					items into a cache that has not reached its size
					limit.
				</p>
				<p>
					Additional testing shows that when the size limit it
					reached, JCS and EHCache perform similarly for puts
					and gets. Although JCS gets are significantly faster
					when the items are present, they are almost exactly
					the same when the items are not in the cache. My
					initial tests revealed a less than 1% difference,
					but subsequent runs showed JCS as 20% faster. More
					tests are needed before the results are conclusive.
				</p>
				<p>
					Since, neither cache will be a relevant bottleneck
					in any application where a cache would be useful,
					the differences in performance may be beside the
					point. Nevertheless, it is important to note that
					the EHCache web site provides, what appears to be,
					false test data.
				</p>
				<p>
					The peculiar result is that a few years back EHCache
					took the JCS source code, removed most of its
					features, and ended up with something that performs
					worse.
				</p>
			</subsection>


			<subsection name="Test Data">
				<p>Here is the data from the first test:</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 651; millis per = 0.01302
					JCS get time for 50000 = 160; millis per = 0.0032
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 481; millis per =
					0.00962 EHCache get time for 50000 = 110; millis per
					= 0.0022
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 240; millis per = 0.0048
					JCS get time for 50000 = 90; millis per = 0.0018
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 491; millis per =
					0.00982 EHCache get time for 50000 = 120; millis per
					= 0.0024
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 241; millis per = 0.00482
					JCS get time for 50000 = 80; millis per = 0.0016
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 551; millis per =
					0.01102 EHCache get time for 50000 = 110; millis per
					= 0.0022
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 240; millis per = 0.0048
					JCS get time for 50000 = 90; millis per = 0.0018
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 481; millis per =
					0.00962 EHCache get time for 50000 = 130; millis per
					= 0.0026
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 230; millis per = 0.0046
					JCS get time for 50000 = 181; millis per = 0.00362
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 520; millis per =
					0.0104 EHCache get time for 50000 = 101; millis per
					= 0.00202
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 220; millis per = 0.0044
					JCS get time for 50000 = 90; millis per = 0.0018
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 641; millis per =
					0.01282 EHCache get time for 50000 = 110; millis per
					= 0.0022
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 250; millis per = 0.0050
					JCS get time for 50000 = 121; millis per = 0.00242
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 590; millis per =
					0.0118 EHCache get time for 50000 = 101; millis per
					= 0.00202
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 260; millis per = 0.0052
					JCS get time for 50000 = 100; millis per = 0.0020
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 581; millis per =
					0.01162 EHCache get time for 50000 = 100; millis per
					= 0.0020
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 290; millis per = 0.0058
					JCS get time for 50000 = 121; millis per = 0.00242
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 570; millis per =
					0.0114 EHCache get time for 50000 = 121; millis per
					= 0.00242
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 210; millis per = 0.0042
					JCS get time for 50000 = 120; millis per = 0.0024
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 561; millis per =
					0.01122 EHCache get time for 50000 = 130; millis per
					= 0.0026
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 250; millis per = 0.0050
					JCS get time for 50000 = 151; millis per = 0.00302
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 560; millis per =
					0.0112 EHCache get time for 50000 = 111; millis per
					= 0.00222
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 250; millis per = 0.0050
					JCS get time for 50000 = 100; millis per = 0.0020
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 711; millis per =
					0.01422 EHCache get time for 50000 = 100; millis per
					= 0.0020
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 251; millis per = 0.00502
					JCS get time for 50000 = 90; millis per = 0.0018
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 511; millis per =
					0.01022 EHCache get time for 50000 = 90; millis per
					= 0.0018
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 220; millis per = 0.0044
					JCS get time for 50000 = 100; millis per = 0.0020
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 491; millis per =
					0.00982 EHCache get time for 50000 = 90; millis per
					= 0.0018
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 230; millis per = 0.0046
					JCS get time for 50000 = 80; millis per = 0.0016
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 201; millis per =
					0.00402 EHCache get time for 50000 = 390; millis per
					= 0.0078
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 201; millis per = 0.00402
					JCS get time for 50000 = 120; millis per = 0.0024
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 180; millis per =
					0.0036 EHCache get time for 50000 = 411; millis per
					= 0.00822
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 210; millis per = 0.0042
					JCS get time for 50000 = 100; millis per = 0.0020
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 210; millis per =
					0.0042 EHCache get time for 50000 = 381; millis per
					= 0.00762
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 240; millis per = 0.0048
					JCS get time for 50000 = 90; millis per = 0.0018
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 211; millis per =
					0.00422 EHCache get time for 50000 = 410; millis per
					= 0.0082
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 221; millis per = 0.00442
					JCS get time for 50000 = 80; millis per = 0.0016
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 210; millis per =
					0.0042 EHCache get time for 50000 = 411; millis per
					= 0.00822
				</p>
				<p>
					JCS put time for 50000 = 220; millis per = 0.0044
					JCS get time for 50000 = 80; millis per = 0.0016
					EHCache put time for 50000 = 190; millis per =
					0.0038 EHCache get time for 50000 = 411; millis per
					= 0.00822
				</p>
				<p>Finished 20 loops of 50000 gets and puts</p>
				<p>
					Put average for JCS = 256 Put average for EHCache =
					447 JCS puts took 0.57270694 times the EHCache , the
					goal is less than 1.0x
				</p>
				<p>
					Get average for JCS = 107 Get average for EHCache =
					196 JCS gets took 0.54591835 times the EHCache , the
					goal is less than 1.0x
				</p>
			</subsection>

			<subsection name="A Test Class">
				<p>Here is the test class:</p>

				<source>
					<![CDATA[
package org.apache.commons.jcs;

import junit.framework.TestCase;
import net.sf.ehcache.Cache;
import net.sf.ehcache.CacheManager;
import net.sf.ehcache.Element;

import org.apache.commons.logging.Log;
import org.apache.commons.logging.LogFactory;
import org.apache.commons.jcs.engine.CompositeCacheAttributes;
import org.apache.commons.jcs.engine.behavior.ICompositeCacheAttributes;
import org.apache.commons.jcs.utils.struct.LRUMap;

/**
 * Compare JCS vs ehcache performance.
 *
 * @author Aaron Smuts
 *
 */
public class JCSvsEHCachePerformanceTest
    extends TestCase
{

    float ratioPut = 0;

    float ratioGet = 0;

    // the jcs to competitor
    float target = 1.0f;

    int loops = 20;

    int tries = 50000;

    /**
     * Compare performance between JCS and EHCache. Fail if JCS is not as fast.
     * Print the ratio.
     *
     * @throws Exception
     *
     */
    public void testJCSvsEHCache()
        throws Exception
    {

        Log log = LogFactory.getLog( LRUMap.class );
        if ( log.isDebugEnabled() )
        {
            System.out.println( "The log level must be at info or above for the a performance test." );
            return;
        }

        doWork();

        assertTrue( this.ratioPut < target );
        assertTrue( this.ratioGet < target );

    }

    /**
     * This runs a series of gets and puts for both JCS and EHCache. The test
     * will fail if JCS is not faster.
     *
     * @throws Exception
     *
     */
    public void doWork()
        throws Exception
    {

        int maxSize = 1000000;

        // create the two caches.
        CacheManager ehMgr = CacheManager.getInstance();
        // Create an ehcache with a max size of maxSize, no swap, with items
        // that can expire, with maximum idle time to live of 500 seconds, and
        // maximum idel time of 500 seconds.
        Cache eh = new Cache( "testJCSvsEHCache", maxSize, false, false, 500, 500 );
        ehMgr.addCache( eh );

        // Create a similarly configured JCS that uses the LRU memory cache.
        // maxSize elements that are not eternal. No disk cache is configured.
        ICompositeCacheAttributes cattr = new CompositeCacheAttributes();
        cattr.setMaxObjects( maxSize );
        CacheAccess<String, String> jcs = JCS.getInstance( "testJCSvsEHCache", cattr );

        // run settings
        long start = 0;
        long end = 0;
        long time = 0;
        float tPer = 0;

        long putTotalJCS = 0;
        long getTotalJCS = 0;
        long putTotalEHCache = 0;
        long getTotalEHCache = 0;

        String jcsDisplayName = "JCS";
        String ehCacheDisplayName = "";

        try
        {
            for ( int j = 0; j < loops; j++ )
            {

                jcsDisplayName = "JCS      ";
                start = System.currentTimeMillis();
                for ( int i = 0; i < tries; i++ )
                {
                    jcs.put( "key:" + i, "data" + i );
                }
                end = System.currentTimeMillis();
                time = end - start;
                putTotalJCS += time;
                tPer = Float.intBitsToFloat( (int) time ) / Float.intBitsToFloat( tries );
                System.out
                    .println( jcsDisplayName + " put time for " + tries + " = " + time + "; millis per = " + tPer );

                start = System.currentTimeMillis();
                for ( int i = 0; i < tries; i++ )
                {
                    jcs.get( "key:" + i );
                }
                end = System.currentTimeMillis();
                time = end - start;
                getTotalJCS += time;
                tPer = Float.intBitsToFloat( (int) time ) / Float.intBitsToFloat( tries );
                System.out
                    .println( jcsDisplayName + " get time for " + tries + " = " + time + "; millis per = " + tPer );

                // /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
                ehCacheDisplayName = "EHCache  ";

                start = System.currentTimeMillis();
                for ( int i = 0; i < tries; i++ )
                {
                    Element ehElm = new Element( "key:" + i, "data" + i );

                    eh.put( ehElm );
                }
                end = System.currentTimeMillis();
                time = end - start;
                putTotalEHCache += time;
                tPer = Float.intBitsToFloat( (int) time ) / Float.intBitsToFloat( tries );
                System.out.println( ehCacheDisplayName + " put time for " + tries + " = " + time + "; millis per = "
                    + tPer );

                start = System.currentTimeMillis();
                for ( int i = 0; i < tries; i++ )
                {
                    eh.get( "key:" + i );
                }
                end = System.currentTimeMillis();
                time = end - start;
                getTotalEHCache += time;
                tPer = Float.intBitsToFloat( (int) time ) / Float.intBitsToFloat( tries );
                System.out.println( ehCacheDisplayName + " get time for " + tries + " = " + time + "; millis per = "
                    + tPer );

                System.out.println( "\n" );
            }

        }
        catch ( Exception e )
        {
            e.printStackTrace( System.out );
            System.out.println( e );
        }

        long putAvJCS = putTotalJCS / loops;
        long getAvJCS = getTotalJCS / loops;
        long putAvHashtable = putTotalEHCache / loops;
        long getAvHashtable = getTotalEHCache / loops;

        System.out.println( "Finished " + loops + " loops of " + tries + " gets and puts" );

        System.out.println( "\n" );
        System.out.println( "Put average for " + jcsDisplayName + "  = " + putAvJCS );
        System.out.println( "Put average for " + ehCacheDisplayName + " = " + putAvHashtable );
        ratioPut = Float.intBitsToFloat( (int) putAvJCS ) / Float.intBitsToFloat( (int) putAvHashtable );
        System.out.println( jcsDisplayName + " puts took " + ratioPut + " times the " + ehCacheDisplayName
            + ", the goal is <" + target + "x" );

        System.out.println( "\n" );
        System.out.println( "Get average for  " + jcsDisplayName + "  = " + getAvJCS );
        System.out.println( "Get average for " + ehCacheDisplayName + " = " + getAvHashtable );
        ratioGet = Float.intBitsToFloat( (int) getAvJCS ) / Float.intBitsToFloat( (int) getAvHashtable );
        System.out.println( jcsDisplayName + " gets took " + ratioGet + " times the " + ehCacheDisplayName
            + ", the goal is <" + target + "x" );

    }

}

        ]]>
				</source>
			</subsection>
		</section>


		<section name="JCS vs EHCache Disk Cache">
			<p>
				It is very difficult to compare the ehcache disk store
				and the JCS Indexed Disk Cache.
			</p>
			<p>The JCS version is much more sophisticated.</p>
			<p>
				JCS puts items into a queue called purgatory. While they
				are in this queue, they are still accessible. This queue
				gets worked when items are in it. The number of threads
				used in the system as a whole for disk caches is
				configurable using the thread pool configuration options
				in JCS. I could have 1000 regions and only use 3 threads
				to work the disk queues. From what I can tell EH will
				use 1 thread per region. This is worse than the JCS
				default, which uses a queue that kills its threads when
				they are not used. . . . and much worse than using JCS
				with a thread pool.
			</p>
			<p>
				The size of JCS purgatory is configurable, so you can
				avoid catastrophe if something goes wrong with the queue
				worker. EH doesn't have any such safety.
			</p>
			<p>
				JCS limits the number of keys that can be kept for the
				disk cache. EH cannot do this.
			</p>
			<p>
				The ehcache disk version is very simple. It puts an
				unlimited number of items in a temporary store. You can
				easily fill this up and run out of memory. You can put
				items into JCS purgatory faster than they can be gc'd
				but it is much more difficult. The EH store is then
				flushed to disk every 200ms. While EH is flushing the
				entire disk cache blocks!
			</p>
			<p>
				JCS disk cache is based on a continuous spooling model,
				not a stop the world model like EH. In most cases the EH
				model will work out, but not if you put a lot of big
				items on disk at once. If you want an even distribution
				of disk cache response times, then you should use JCS.
			</p>
			<p>
				The EH disk store also seems to just keep growing. After
				several tests, the size of the data file was 10 times
				that of JCS and EH was taking 10 times as long.
			</p>
			<p>
				You can saturate the EH version much more quickly, since
				it will hold as many items as you can put in in 200 ms.
			</p>
			<p>
				I tried with 100k and JCS could handle it, but EH died
				with an out of memory exception.
			</p>
			<p>
				EH cache developed its disk store in response to a bug
				in the JCS version. This bug was fixed a few years ago .
				. . The nice thing about JCS is that it is completely
				pluggable. It would take about 30 minutes to plug a
				different disk cache implementation into JCS if you so
				pleased . . . .
			</p>
		</section>

	</body>
</document>