RE: HTTPAPI Performance Issue

[Mike Krebs <mkrebs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Before I could finish my thoughts, I see a few others have chimed in...

A few thought questions...

Is the process running via HTTPAPI not fast enough or just slower than the JADE?

Are you running with debug turned on? If yes, turn it off.

When making the comparison, are you comparing the same thing?
What is your program doing?
Does it write to the data queue or it is actually doing the rest of the work?

Are you using Expat or something else to consume the service?

Are you writing to file, user space or other for consuming the web service?

Is the program running one and done or looping for content? How often does it run?

Scott suggested timestamps...Here is what I would do:
   - One way to do this (an overkill method) is to go into HTTPUTILR4 and add a timestamp in the http_dmsg procedure by altering this line:
     c                   eval      wwMsg = %trimr(peMsgTxt) + x'0d25'

     c                   eval      wwMsg = %char(%timestamp()) + ' ' +
     c                                     %trimr(peMsgTxt) + x'0d25'
   - Run the Install program again and you will get timestamps at certain points in the debug listing.
   - If you are using XML parsing in your program, add something like this to the start of the procedure or at other times in your program.
       http_dmsg('Incoming!');
  - Now you know how long each section is taking.

Check your connection from the IBMi to your webservice server. Our IBMi often pings twice as long as my PC to outside services (inside services are the same speed). Should be minor difference in downloading a file but might make a difference if you're doing significant downloads. For us, I believe this is a function of how we get through our firewall but because I don't care about the milliseconds/seconds for what we do, I have not investigated or tried to optimize that part. But if the download portion is taking any significant time, you might want to tracert from the Jade box and the IBMi and see if there are any significant differences.



-----Original Message-----
From: ftpapi-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ftpapi-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pat Kennedy (IT)
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 8:04 AM
To: ftpapi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: HTTPAPI Performance Issue

Scott,

Are there any tuning requirements on the iSeries to use the HTTPAPI API? I'm looking to replace a JADE process that consumes .NET web service and have been running performance tests comparing the HTTPAPI called from RPGLE versus the JADE approach. The JADE process has been tuned for optimal performance and outperforms my new process using HTTPAPI. I trying to justify going with this approach but have been running into performance issues.

My prototype process uses HTTPAPI to consume the .NET web service directly from an RPGLE program as opposed to the JADE process that uses a series of data queues to communicate between RPGLE and a Java process that consumes a .Net web service. My company would like to retire JADE and is looking at either migrating the JADE process to WAS8 or directly consuming the web service via an RPGLE program using your HTTPAPI API.

Your  assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated.

Thank You.

Patrick
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the FTPAPI mailing list.  To unsubscribe, please go to:
http://www.scottklement.com/mailman/listinfo/ftpapi
-----------------------------------------------------------------------