WAS vs JBoss, WebLogic, Tomcat (year 2015)

1. IBM WebSphere Application Server competitive positioning vs. JBoss EAP, Tomcat, TomEE, tc Server Roman Kharkovski IBM, Executive IT Specialist kharkovski@us.ibm.com December 11, 2015 © 2015 IBM Corporation

2. 2 Leverages 100+ OSS Packages Leverages 100+ OSS Packages Leverages 30 OSS Packages Leverages 40+ OSS Packages MQ 3,000+ IBM developers involved in OSS projects. IBM leads 80+ and contributes to 350+ OSS projects. http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource

3. 3 Source: Gartner, Market Share Analysis: Enterprise Software Market Share, Worldwide. Published March , 2015 2014 ($B) YTY growth rank share growth rank share growth rank share growth BPM 2.5 6.4% # 1 28.5% 1.4% # 3 7.9% 2.3% # 22 0.2% - ESB 2.77 10.4% # 1 29.0% 7.5% # 2 21.6% 2.6% # 16 0.4% 36.6% MOM 1.35 8% # 1 75.0% 6.5% - - - # 9 0.3% 38.9% MFT Suites 0.7 15.6% # 1 31.3% 11.4% # 13 0.9% - - - - TP Monitors 1.86 2.8% # 1 85.2% 4.% # 2 10.0% -5.9% - - - Appliances AIM 0.8 15.2 # 1 18.5% 7.1% # 3 0.8% 1.5% - - - B2B 0.9 3.8% # 1 21.2% 0.7% - - - - - - App Servers 5.4 14.6% # 2 28.5% 10.2% # 1 33.5% 1.6% # 5 2.6% 36.6% Portals 1.8 1.4% # 2 24.4% -8.5% # 3 21.1% 2.4% # 10 0.8% 30.2% Svc Governance 6.2 17.5% # 1 11.2% 6.1% # 2 10.6% 1.5% - - - Other AIM 4.9 5.1% # 2 28.2% 30.0% # 17 0.6% -17% # 28 0.2% 32.5% According to Gartner, IBM holds #1 position in the middleware software for the past 13 years

4. 4 Gartner does not endorse any vendor, product or service depicted in its research publications, and does not advise technology users to select only those vendors with the highest ratings. Gartner research publications consist of the opinions of Gartner's research organization and should not be construed as statements of fact. Gartner disclaims all warranties, expressed or implied, with respect to this research, including any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose Magic Quadrant for On-Premises Application Platforms Daniel Sholler, Yefim V. Natis, Massimo Pezzini, Kimihiko Iijima, Jess Thompson, Ross Altman June 27, 2013 This Magic Quadrant graphic was published by Gartner, Inc. as part of a larger research note and should be evaluated in the context of the entire URL “New and composite on- premises applications need a complex array of runtime technologies and development capabilities.” Source: Gartner (June 2013) IBM named a leader in the Magic Quadrant for On- Premises Application Platforms

5. 5 Technical Overview Features, functions, speeds and feeds…

6. 6 What is “new” in WAS v8.5(2012)  Improved performance, security, etc.  Java EE 6 support, JDK 7  Intelligent management features (used to be WVE) – health management, application versioning, dynamic clusters, traffic throttling, SLA control, etc.  Added batch (used to be separate product)  New Liberty Profile (developer focus)  Improved OSGi support and SCA 1.1  Pluggable JDK (choice of v6 or v7)  Configuration checkpoints (full, delta, compare, restore, etc.)  WAS Express limit per server raised up to 480 PVU  HTTP clustering for WAS Base for up to 5 JVMs  Socket based license option for WAS Base (since v7) v8.5.5(2013)  Improved performance, security, JMS, etc.  Troubleshooting (XCT, memory leak policies, HPEL, ISA Data Collector)  WXS bundled with all WAS editions  Liberty Profile with enhanced programming model (Web profile + JMS, MDB, JAXWS, clustering, etc. – production focus)  ODR merged into IHS and Apache server plugin  Service mapping (from WESB)  Free Liberty Core license for ISV applications  HTTP clustering for WAS Express, Base and Liberty Core is now unlimited  Fixed Term License option for all editions of WAS (like annual subscription)

7. 7 What is new in WAS Liberty Profile 2H’2014  Improved performance, security, etc.  Auto Scaling and Dynamic Routing  Partial Java EE 7 (Servlet 3.1, WebSocket 1.0, Concurrency 1.0, JSON-P 1.0)  Improved v2v and competitive Migration Toolkit  Web-based SSO for applications with OpenID 2.0  Support for CouchDB  REST connector for non-Java clients  Support for Enterprise Web Services (JSR 109 MR)  A number of beta features (SIP, JMS 2.0, JAX-RS 2.0, JDBC 4.1, JPA 2.1, Batch, WebRTC, bean validation 1.1, EJB 3.2 lite, etc.)  and more… 1H’2015  Production ready support and certification for Java EE 7 and Java SE 8  Improved Admin Center (tagging, searching, monitoring, scalability, config)  Improved developer tools (remote debugger, repository integration)  Improved support for IBM Bluemix PaaS  Docker images and support  SPNEGO, SAML (beta)  Log collector and analytics (beta)  No-charge Liberty Base for production (up to 2GB Java heap per organization)  “2 for 1” licenses for 6 months on SoftLayer  Monthly pricing option (for most of IBM software) First production server to do so!

8. 8 WAS Liberty Profile + WAS Developer Tools for Eclipse Unzip install / deploy IM or unzip to install. Option to deploy “server package” of app + config + required subset of server runtime for highest density deploy User Extensions Add custom features and integrate 3rd party components via Liberty extensions interface Fidelity to full profile Same reliable containers & QOS. Develop on Liberty profile and deploy to Liberty or full-profile WAS Integrated tools Powerful tools in free WDT Eclipse feature, maven / ant / Jenkins integration, migration tools, Bluemix integration Lightweight cluster mgmt Liberty servers can join a lightweight cluster for workload balancing and high availability Dynamic Server Profile No server restarts required. Configured by app at a fine-grained level. Install new features from repository (local or remote) with no restart Start fast, run efficiently Starts in <3s; Mem footprint <70MB; (TradeLite benchmark) Cloud enabled Hosted on IBM Bluemix PaaS. Buildpacks for other cloud providers “Developer First” Focus Simplified to one file, shareable XML server configuration with Zero V2V migration. Continuous delivery of new function – new beta every month. Free for development Small Download ~60MB for Web Profile features, ~100MB for full profile Java EE 7 Certified and Java EE Web Profile 6 & 7 certified What is WAS Liberty Profile Free for development and up to 2 GB for Liberty Base production

9. 9 WAS Liberty zOS WAS ND Liberty webProfile-6.0 WAS Liberty Core WAS Liberty Liberty v8.5.5.6 was the first Java EE 7 production server collectiveController-1.0clusterMember-1.0 scalingController-1.0 scalingMember-1.0 dynamicRouting-1.0 webSocket-1.1 webSocket-1.0servlet-3.1 jsp-2.3 jsf-2.2 ejbLite-3.2 jdbc-4.1 jndi-1.0 appSecurity-2.0 managedBeans-1.0 ssl-1.0 beanValidation-1.1 cdi-1.2 jpa-2.1 jaxrs-2.0 jaxrsClient-2.0 el-3.0 jsonp-1.0 mongodb-2.0 wsSecurity-1.1 wmqJmsClient-2.0 wasJmsServer-1.0 jmsMdb-3.2 wasJmsClient-2.0jaxws-2.2 jaxb-2.2 wasJmsSecurity-1.0 jca-1.7 couchdb-1.0 jcaInboundSecur-1.0 mdb-3.2 jms-2.0 ejb-3.2 j2eeManagement-1.1 ejbPersistentTimer-3.2 ejbRemote-3.2 jaspic-1.0 jacc-1.0 batch-1.0 appClientSupport-1.0 javaeeClient-7.0 ejbHome-3.2 openid-2.0 openidConnectServer-1.0 openidConnectClient-1.0 spnego-1.0 osgiAppIntegration-1.0 wab-1.0 concurrent-1.0 collectiveMember-1.0 restConnector-1.0 sessionDatabase-1.0 ldapRegistry-3.0 webCache-1.0 distributedMap-1.0 osgiConsole-1.0 json-1.0 timedOperations-1.0monitor-1.0 oauth-2.0 blueprint-1.0 adminCenter-1.0 serverStatus-1.0 eventLogging-1.0 requestTiming-1.0 javaMail-1.5 zosSecurity-1.0 zosTransaction-1.0 zosLocalAdapters-1.0zosWlm-1.0zosConnect-1.0 batchManagement-1.0 Newin8.5.5.6

10. 10 Liberty WAS WebLogic TomEE Tomcat tc Server JBoss Java EE 7 Beta WildFly Java EE Web profile 7 Beta WildFly Java EE Web profile 6 Java SE 7 and 8 8 in Beta Servlet, JSP, JSF MyFaces JSF JDBC Java Persistence API (JPA) Java Message Service (JMS) * TomEE+ RabbitMQ 1.1 Java Transaction API (JTA) Bean validation Java Management Extensions (JMX) Java API for XML Web Services (JAX-WS) * TomEE+ Context Dependency Injection (CDI) Java API for RESTful Web Services (JAX-RS) TomEE+ OSGi EJB lite EJB full WebRTC WebSocket (JSR 356) Beta JSONP Oauth Concurrency Utilities for Java EE (JSR 236) WildFly Batch API (JSR 352) Beta Spring Batch WildFly JNDI Read-only Read-only SAML WS-Notification WS-Policy WS-Trust WS-ReliableMessaging Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) * Portlet API dev only WS-Addressing RMI-IIOP * Java Connector Architecture (JCA) * TomEE+ Java Auth. & Authoriz. Service (JAAS) JACC and JASPIC Excellent Good Limited No support API support

11. 11 Liberty 8.5.5.7 WAS 8.5.5.6 WASND 8.5.5.6 Tomcat 8.0.26 tcServer 3.1.2 JBoss EAP 6.4 WLS 12.2.1 Java EE 7 Beta Beta SoD Java EE 6 Web Profile TomEE JDK 1.7 and 1.8 1.7 1.7 3rd party 3rd party RHEL only Performance Security Transaction management TomEE Messaging Engine TomEE+ Caching engine included (IMDG) WXS WXS WXS Infinispan Admin GUI Single server Troubleshooting, profiling, tuning tools Admin scripting Simple V2V migration and upgrades Log analytics Beta Dynamic clustering and auto-scaling ND SLA enforcement and monitoring for requests Application versioning Automated server health management EJB and JMS clustering and failover HTTP plugin with WLM and HTTPSession failover Dynamic configuration updates (avoid restarts) Simple install, lightweight runtime, small footprint Cloud (Public / Private / Hybrid) 3rd party Appliance IPAS IPAS IPAS Free sw included (WLM, HTTPD, LDAP, DBMS) ND Platform certifications (OS, HW, DBMS, Adapters) WW support (local language, local hours) Excellent Good Limited Very Limited No support

12. 12 WAS classic WAS Liberty Oracle WLS JBoss EAP Apache Tomcat Basic web application security Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Java EE Security Standards Yes Yes Yes Yes no Role administrative security (who can do what) Yes no Yes no no Resource administrative security (who can manage what) Yes no Yes Yes no Audit and track changes made to the server configuration Yes no Yes Some no LDAP support and compatibility Yes Yes Yes Some Some Federated User Registry Yes Yes Yes no no SPNEGO Web Inbound Yes Yes Yes Yes no Kerberos Yes no Yes Yes no OAUTH Yes Yes Yes Yes no SAML Yes Yes Yes Yes no OpenID Yes Yes no no no OpenID Connect Yes Yes no no no Keys and Certificate Management Yes no Yes no no Multiple Security Configurations Yes no Yes no no DB2 Trusted Context for Identity propagation Yes Yes no no no Secure Engineering Accreditation OTT-PS Yes Yes no no no Encryption Standard FIPS 140-2, 800-131a Yes Yes no Some Some Security

13. 13 So you say: “I simply use Tomcat”? • Most people use a *lot* more than just Tomcat. What about: • Once you add all of these (and more), how do you make it work together? (i.e. 3rd party CDI wont work with 4th party JTA, etc.) • What is the performance of all of the above with all the JAR scanning going on? • How do you test/manage/secure/debug all of this? • Are you coding to standards? Are you coding your app or building your own Java EE server? • Lack of API support in Tomcat leads to lost development productivity and additional expense for integration and testing REST SOAP JPA WS-* JTA Security JMS CDI Bean validation OSGI JTA EJB WebRTC Batch Concurre ncy Oauth SAML Other Java EE? vs.

14. 14 Network Deployment (classic + Liberty) JavaWeb (Servlet/JSP,JDBC) JavaEE(WS*,JMS,EJB,JPA, CDI,JAXB,JTA,JCA,Batch,etc.) OSGi,SIP,SCA,SAML, Kerberos,COBOL/z,etc. Hundreds of serversHandful of servers Programmingmodel(APIs) Base (classic + Liberty) Express (classic + Liberty) WebLogic Standard Enterprise Suite WebSphere Liberty Core WebSphere Scale Server capability map JBoss EAP Tomcat TomEE tc Server

15. 15 Java servers from Developer point of view Liberty 8.5.5.7 WAS 8.5.5.6 Tomcat 8.0.26 TomEE+ 1.7.24 Jetty 9.3.2 Glass Fish 4.1 Web Logic 12.2.13 WildFly 9.0.1 JBoss EAP 6.4 Server stop+start5 4.9 sec 34.1 sec 5.5 sec 11.2 sec 3.1 sec 9.4 sec 22.3 sec 10.2 sec 9.2 sec App redeploy5 1.2 sec 6.1 sec 2.3 sec 2.5 sec 2.2 sec 2.5 sec 5.0 sec 1.2 sec 1.2 sec RAM5 59 MB 175 MB 125 MB 236 MB 102 MB 376 MB 451 MB 269 MB 430 MB Download size1 11 to 94 MB 3 GB 10 MB 48 MB 10 MB 103 MB 211 MB 127 MB 158 MB Size installed1 15-123 MB 2.6 GB 17 MB 52 MB 12 MB 214 MB 595 MB 159 MB 174 MB Size per instance 0.5 MB 40 MB 0.4 MB 0.4 MB 0.4 MB 96 MB 6 MB 1.5 MB 1.2 MB Dev. Install6 5 sec 30 min 2 sec 3 sec 1 sec 5 sec 10 min 5 sec 5 sec # of config files 1+ 100+ 8+ 12+ 20+ 14+ 22+ 16+ 16+ Dynamic config2 99% 80% 20% 20% 20% 20% 80% 60% 60% IDE Configuration Editor Eclipse UI Browser UI None None None Browser UI Browser UI Browser UI Browser UI DevOps Java EE Java EE 7 Java EE 6+ JSP/ Servlet Java EE 6 Web Prof. JSP/ Servlet Java EE 7 Java EE 7 Java EE 7 Java EE 6 Free Dev. License IBM IBM Apache 2.0 Apache 2.0 EPL 1.0 CDDL 1.1 Oracle LGPL 2.1 LGPL 2.1 Free Dev. Support IBM7 IBM7 Self Self Self Self $ Self Red Hat8 Excellent Good Limited Very Limited No support Maven, Jenkins, Ant, Chef and other DevOps tools are supported with some minor differences Eclipse, IntelliJ IDEA, NetBeans are supported with some minor differences

16. 16 OSGi support • First surfaced to applications in a WAS v7 Feature Pack • Modular development, deployment and management • Blueprint (Standardized Spring Component Model) • Web applications (Java EE 5) • Remote Services and Heterogeneous Assembly (SCA) • Included in the WAS Base in v8 and continually extended: • Java EE 6 Web technologies • Post-deployment configuration • Performance metrics • In-place Update • Application Extension • Modular EJB • Blueprint Role-based Security • OSGi Applications Web Console • Liberty Profile support • WAS classic and WAS Liberty have good OSGi support Tomcat and JBoss do not support OSGi

17. 17 WebSphere release-to-release performance increases due to software and hardware improvements EjOPS/core As per SPEC Published Data as of 2/18/2015: http://www.spec.org/jEnterprise2010/results/jEnterprise2010.html SPECjEnterprise2010 benchmark results 126.7 149.4 226.7 292.6 307.9 524.6 606 688 754 823 939 WAS 7.0.0.5 (8 core x86) WAS 7.0.0.9 (8 core x86) WAS 7.0.0.9 (8 core x86) WAS 8.0 (8 core x86) WAS 8.0 (12 core x86) WAS 8.5 (12 core x86) WAS 8.5 (16 core x86) WAS 8.5.5.4 (28 core x86) WAS 8.5 (16 core Power 7) WAS 8.5.5 (16 core Power 7+) WAS 8.5.5.2 (24 core Power 8 s824) January 2010 April2014 SPEC and SPECjEnterprise 2010 are registered trademarks of the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation. Results from www.spec.org as of 02/18/2015 IBM SPECjEnterprise results mentioned are 1013.40 EjOPS, 1194.80 EjOPS, 1813.37 EjOPS, 2341.12 EjOPS, 3694.35 EJOPS, 6295.46 EjOPS, 9696.43 EjOPS, 19282.14 EjoPS, 12,066.73 EjOPS, 13,161.07 EjOPS and 22,543.34 EjOPS published on Jan 2 2010, Feb 25 2010, Apr 27 2010, Jun 20 2011, Jun 17 2011, Apr 26 2012, Nov 14 2012, Feb 18, 2015, Mar 6 2013, Apr 22 2013 and Apr 22, 2014 respectively

18. 18 SPECjEnterprise2010 Comparison of IBM vs. Oracle performance JOPS per core starting from 2011 W LS 12c on T5-2 (Jan'14) W LS 12c on T5-8 (Sep'13) W LS 11g on T5-8 (M ar'13) W LS 11g on Sun x86 (Feb'12) W LS 11g on Sun x86 (Jul'11) W LS 11g on T4-4 (Aug'11) W LS 11g on Dellx86 (Apr'11) JOPS/core 532.30 457.14 448.61 519.39 452.29 313.32 298.67 WAS 8.5.5.2 on Power8 (Apr'14) 939.31 1.76 2.05 2.09 1.81 2.08 3.00 3.15 WAS 8.5.5 on Power7+ (Apr'13) 822.57 1.55 1.80 1.83 1.58 1.82 2.63 2.75 WAS 8.5 on x3650 x86 (Nov'12) 606.03 1.14 1.33 1.35 1.17 1.34 1.93 2.03 WAS 8.5 on Power7+ (Sep'12) 681.39 1.28 1.49 1.52 1.31 1.51 2.17 2.28 WAS 8.5 on HS22 blade x86 (Apr'12) 524.62 0.99 1.15 1.17 1.01 1.16 1.67 1.76 WAS 8.5 on HS22 blade x86 (Jul'11) 307.86 0.58 0.67 0.69 0.59 0.68 0.98 1.03 WAS 8.5 on HS22 blade x86 (Jun'11) 292.64 0.55 0.64 0.65 0.56 0.65 0.93 0.98 1 even result >1 IBM advantage <1 Oracle advantage More recent results Morerecent Benchmark results SPECjEnterprise2010 Comparison of IBM WAS ND vs. Oracle WLS Enterprise: $ cost per JOPS starting from 2011 W LS 12c on T5-8 (Sep'13) W LS 11g on T5-8 (M ar'13) W LS 11g on Sun x86 (Feb'12) W LS 11g on Sun x86 (Jul'11) W LS 11g on T4-4 (Aug'11) W LS 11g on Dellx86 (Apr'11) $/JOPS $131 $153 $251 $200 $175 $245 WAS 8.5.5 on Power7+ (Apr'13) $81 1.62 1.90 3.11 2.47 2.16 3.03 WAS 8.5 on x3650 x86 (Nov'12) $111 1.18 1.38 2.26 1.80 1.57 2.21 WAS 8.5 on Power7+ (Sep'12) $223 0.59 0.69 1.13 0.90 0.78 1.10 WAS 8.5 on HS22 blade x86 (Apr'12) $244 0.54 0.63 1.03 0.82 0.72 1.00 WAS 8.5 on HS22 blade x86 (Jul'11) $168 0.78 0.91 1.50 1.19 1.04 1.46 WAS 8.5 on HS22 blade x86 (Jun'11) $108 1.21 1.42 2.33 1.85 1.62 2.27 Morerecent More recent results

19. 19 IBM WebSphere 12 years of performance leadership SPECjEnterprise2010 (1) SPEC and SPECjEnterprise2010 are registered trademarks of the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation. Results from www.spec.org as of 04/04/2013 Oracle SUN SPARC T5-8 449 EjOPS/core SPECjEnterprise2010 (Oracle's WLS best SPECjEnterprise2010 EjOPS/core result on SPARC). IBM Power730 823 EjOPS/core (World Record SPECjEnterprise2010 EJOPS/core result), (2) Results from www.spec.org as of 04/29/2012 Oracle SUN SPARC T4-4 313 EjOPS/core SPECjEnterprise2010 (Oracle's WLS best SPECjEnterprise2010 EjOPS/core result on SPARC). IBM Power780 681 EjOPS/core (World Record SPECjEnterprise2010 EJOPS/core result), (3) Results from www.spec.org as of 11/14/2012 Oracle SUN Fire X4170M3 519.39 EjOPS/core SPECjEnterprise2010 (Oracle's WLS best SPECjEnterprise2010 EjOPS/core result on Sandy Bridge). IBM WAS 8.5 System x3650 M4 Intel Sandy Bridge EjOPS/core (World Record SPECjEnterprise2010 EJOPS/core result) (4) Results from www.spec.org as of 04/29/2012 Oracle SUN Blade Server X6270 M2 452.285 EjOPS/core SPECjEnterprise2010). IBM Websphere HS 22 Blade 524.621 EjOPS/core. EjOPS per processor core (i.e. transactions per core) 524 452 12 cores of Intel Westmere Xeon X5690 processor4 681 313 Oracle Sun SPARC T4-4 vs. IBM Power7 hardware2 606 519 16 cores of Intel Sandy Bridge Xeon E5-2690 processor3  IBM held the most records in ECPerf and was FIRST to publish SPECj2001, SPECj2002, SPECj2004, SPECjEnterprise2010  WAS is 32% faster per core on latest Intel Haswell at half the cost compared to WebLogic1  On latest Intel Haswell processors WAS has the fastest per socker, per core and biggest total EjOPS result compared to WebLogic2  WAS is 105% faster per core at almost half the cost on Power7+ compared to WebLogic on SPARC T53 939 457 Oracle Sun SPARC T5-8 vs. IBM Power7+ hardware1 Intel x64 Haswell (February 2015) 5 IBM: 688 Oracle: 522

20. 20 WAS performance compared to JBoss (1) SPEC and SPECjEnterprise2010 are registered trademarks of the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation. Results from www.spec.org as of 07/30/2015: IBM Power730 939 EjOPS/core (World Record SPECjEnterprise2010 EJOPS/core result), (2) Since JBoss EAP 6.4 does not support Java EE 7, results for WildFly are provided Transactions per core JBoss EAP: 2,721 IBM Liberty: 2,831 TradeLight on x86 (Java EE 7, native OS) 2 803 2,027 SPECjEnterprise2010 (Java EE 6, native OS, WAS Full Profile) 1 1,214 1,574 DayTrader7 on x86_64 (Java EE 7, Docker) 2  IBM held the most records and was first to publish SPECj2001, SPECj2002, SPECj2004, SPECjEnterprise2010 while Red Hat has never published a single result for JBoss EAP  IBM holds World Record for # of transactions per second per core with SPECjEnterprise2010 workload  WAS is up to 2.5 times faster than JBoss EAP (just consider license, hardware, power and cooling savings!)  Many independent customer benchmarks confirm WAS performance advantage  IBM is heavily investing in performance optimizations of WAS for Docker Containers and CloudFoundry 1,316 2,285 DayTrader7 on x86_64 (Java EE 7, native OS) 2 DayTrader3 on x86_64 (Java EE 6, native OS) 939 JBoss never published SPECjEnterprise2010 1.7x 2.5x 1.3x 1.04 times faster ∞x

21. 21 WAS performance compared to Tomcat (1) SPEC and SPECjEnterprise2010 are registered trademarks of the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation. Results from www.spec.org as of 07/30/2015: IBM Power730 939 EjOPS/core (World Record SPECjEnterprise2010 EJOPS/core result), Transactions per core Tomcat: 4,491 IBM: 5,661 TradeLight on x86 (native OS) 2 3,824 8,232 SPECjEnterprise2010 (native OS, WAS Full Profile) 1 4,775 9,297 TradeLight on x86 (two Docker containers) 2  IBM held the most records and was first to publish SPECj2001, SPECj2002, SPECj2004, SPECjEnterprise2010 while Red Hat has never published a single result for JBoss EAP  IBM holds World Record for # of transactions per second per core with SPECjEnterprise2010 workload  Liberty is up to 2.4 times faster than Tomcat (just consider license, hardware, power and cooling savings!)  Many independent customer benchmarks confirm WAS performance advantage  IBM is heavily investing in performance optimizations of WAS for Docker Containers and CloudFoundry 3,188 7,687 TradeLight on x86 (one Docker container) 2 TradeLight on x86 (four Docker containers) 2 939 Tomcat can not run SPECjEnterprise2010 2.4x 2.1x 1.9x 1.3 times faster ∞

22. 22 Global transactions • Enterprises often have to update data in: • Databases (DB2, Oracle DB, MS SQL, Informix) • TP monitors (CICS, Tuxedo) • Messaging servers (IBM MQ, Tibco EMS, ActiveMQ) • Caching servers (WXS), etc. • What happens if there is a failure during the transaction commit? • Tomcat and tc Server do not include a transaction manager • Only support local transactions (with a single resource) • Without a distributed transaction manager, there is no support for two-phase commit for global transactions, where the scope is across multiple resources • Writing business critical code without global transaction management is possible, but is very complex (i.e. error prone and expensive) • WAS and Liberty support distributed transactions with two-phase commit and automatic data recovery in the event of a network failure, ensuring transaction integrity

23. 23 Cloud The saga of “a lost million” Transaction: Transfer $1M 1. Check funds availability in Account1 2. Withdraw funds from the Account1 3. Debit funds to the Account2 4. Update related systems with the right information 5. Write into the audit log for security and compliance reasons Account 1 balance = $1M Account 2 balance = $0 Account 1 balance = $1M Account 2 balance = $1M Account 1 balance = $0M Account 2 balance = $0M Account 1 balance = $0M Account 2 balance = $1M Initial state: Bad outcome: Bad outcome: Good outcome: Credit Card System Account 1 balance = $1M Account 1 balance = $1M Internet Banking System Account 1 balance = $1M Account 1 balance = $1M Audit Log Account 1 balance = $1M Failure Failure Failure Failure Failure Failure Failure Failure Failure Failure Failure Failure Failure Types of failures: 1. Power outage 2. Network error or outage 3. Software failure (OS, DBMS, etc.) 4. Hardware failure 5. Human error 6. Application error 7. DoS or other attack 8. Combination of any of the above

24. 24 Automatic transaction log failover & recovery WAS ND Full Profile provides failover of 2PC transactions • WAS ND can be configured to store transaction logs for each server on shared file system or in the HA RDBMS, which allows all peers to see all logs • When a WAS ND cluster member fails, a peer is elected to recover the Transaction Log from the failed server • In Doubt Transactions from a failed Server are recovered very quickly • Significantly faster and cheaper than hardware clustering (seconds vs. minutes) JBoss, Tomcat and Liberty Profile do not provide similar capabilities, which leads to longer recovery times and more admin labor

25. 25 JBoss high availability issues • Repeated application redeployments eventually require server restarts due to the memory leak issue (Sun and Open JDK PermGen heap gets full and crashes server) • HTTP servers and JBoss App Server JVMs often need restart after configuration updates • Examples: changing the data source pool size or other settings, changing JMS configuration, re-deploying an EAR multiple times (only WAR hot-deploy works, the EAR hot deploy only works for the first couple of times, then causes out of memory errors and JVM crash), etc. • WAS does not need to be restarted as above updates are dynamic • JON server uses database for configuration and monitoring data (Postgres or Oracle) • The DB must be made HA to avoid SPOF and this requires extra license and hw costs • Ripple restart of application servers in a cluster is not provided. Administrator must manually restart servers in a cluster one by one • Transaction log, JMS queues and topics require manual failover effort in case of server failure • WAS failover is automated and takes seconds • Application deployment causes service interruption • WAS ND solves this by introducing the application versioning and graceful client transfer High availability with JBoss may be difficult to achieve without introducing significant redundancy and admin effort

26. 26 Liberty Admin Center A browser-based UI for deploying, monitoring and managing Liberty single servers and collectives • Deploy • Server package (runtime + server + apps) • Monitor • Performance and Health metrics • Log Analytics [beta] • Dashboard, Alerts and Notifications [under investigation] • Manage • Browse, search, filter • Tags and metadata • Start / Stop / Restart • Auto scaling (demo) • Server Configuration [beta] • Health Management [under investigation] Tomcat does not provide similar capabilities, which leads to more admin labor

27. 27 27 IBM Confidential Resource details, multiple target actions, asynchronous Liberty server deployment

28. 28 Beta Liberty Monitoring and Log Analytics Assess the health of your application server using out of the box feature in Liberty to: • Monitor your Application Infrastructure • Identify the root cause of a problem • Ensures High Availability of your application • Plus wide set of additional Java monitoring tools available in the IBM Java Health Center Access the customizable graphs from the Admin Center to: • Monitor: • Used Heap Memory • Loaded Classes • Active JVM Threads • CPU Usage • Liberty MXBeans • Analyze data from: • Access Log, Log Messages, FFDC & Trace Messages

29. 29 Principles of Liberty Collective • Standards-based admin API • Built on JMX (MBeans) • Works with common tools (Jconsole, Jython, etc) • Loosely-coupled • Exploits Liberty composable server model • App servers can easily and quickly be moved in and out of collective • Tested up to 10,000 servers in a collective • Distributed Cache Model • Admin server (controller) is config/state cache • Doubles as bi-directional JMX proxy • Distributed Configuration • App Server owns its own config • App Servers cache sparse config and state in controller • Scalable, Resilient Admin Domain • Highly Available admin server (replica model) • Agentless • Docker images can be part of the collective and auto-scale (beta) Tomcat does not provide similar capabilities => more admin labor

30. 30 Liberty Collective: lightweight management at scale

31. 31 BlueMix vs. OpenShift Online app auto-scaling for Java EE IBM BlueMix Red Hat OpenShift Scaling metrics: JVM Heap Yes no Memory Yes no Throughput Yes no Response time Yes no # of connections no Yes User options: Breach duration Yes no Statistic window Yes no Cooldown period for scaling in&out Yes no Scale in & out instance count Yes no Max & min instance count Yes Yes => Less admin work and more responsive applications with IBM BlueMix

32. 32 WAS classic console command assistance Automatic capture of administrative actions and generation of scripts to be replayed later • While administrator performs actions in the admin GUI (start, stop, deploy, create, etc.) all his actions are automatically written as Jython command script for WAS • This script can be customized and executed multiple times thus saving time to create complex administrative actions and reducing the learning curve Liberty, Tomcat and JBoss do not offer comparable capabilities

33. 33 How do customers really use JBoss EAP in production? • Vast majority of JBoss EAP and WildFly customers are not using clustering • Must tolerate lower quality of services ($$$) and • Red Hat customers are forced to purchase 3rd party management tools, monitoring tools, configuration management tools, performance profilers, etc. • 3rd party tools require license and support payments ($$$) • 3rd party tools are not always in synch with the desired version of JBoss ($$$) • 3rd party vendor viability poses risks ($$$) and • Most JBoss customers invest significant staff time to build home grown scripting frameworks for JBoss management (a combination of shell scripting and generation of JBoss XML files using XSLT, Java or other template mechanism) • Cost to develop, debug, maintain such scripts can be significant ($$$) • New major versions of JBoss (major or minor) are not backwards compatible, causing significant rework of home grown scripts and tools ($$$) • WAS provides needed administrative tools out of the box at no extra cost ”One minute of system downtime can cost an organization anywhere from $2,500 to $10,000 per minute. Using that metric, even 99.9% availability can cost a company $5 million a year” - The Standish Group

34. 34 IBM Garbage Collection and Memory Visualizer (GCMV) GCMV provides analysis and views of your applications verbose gc output. GCMV uses a powerful statistical analysis engine which provides tuning recommendations in these areas: • Memory Leak Detection • Detect Java heap exhaustion and memory leaks • Detect "native" heap exhaustion and memory leaks • Optimizing garbage collection performance • Analyze output from different gc modes (optthruput, optavgpause, gencon, balanced ) • Compare output from multiple logs – side by side • Determine gc overhead, detect long or frequent gc cycles and causes • Recommend settings to avoid long or frequent gc cycles • Recommend optimum gc policy • Fine tuning of Java heap size • Determine peak and average memory usage • Recommend Java heap settings • Flexible user interface makes it possible to carry out further analysis of the data and to "drill down" into the causes of trends and export of data into .csv or jpeg Oracle Java Mission Control (JMC) is free for development use only. JMC does provide data visualization, but it does not make tuning recommendations, nor does it compare various run results side by side. This is a major usability issue.

35. 35

36. 36 IBM WebSphere Performance Tuning Toolkit (PTT) PTT is designed to help users tune the performance of WAS using statistical technology. The toolkit collects performance data and consolidates it into a multidimensional data cube. • Find potential performance problems • PTT shows detailed status of system with easily understood charts and forms. Users can analyze the performance data from various perspectives. • PTT helps to find an error as soon as it occurs - monitor the servlet errors, transaction rollback, transaction timeout, JDBC connection timeout, thread hung, etc. • Accelerate performance tuning process • User can tune many servers in one step in a centralized view by running tuning scripts within the workbench, download or upload performance related settings manually or via script • Health Check • PTT can detect the performance decline and take actions automatically based on predefined rules. Rule engine detects the abnormal symptoms according to user defined rules (with ability to create and edit existing rules) • Operations to facilitate problems determination • PTT can generate thread dump and heap dump for the JVM, enable trace settings, extract the connection pool contents • Report engine • Online and offline analysis and reporting (generate, export and print report) Those using WebLogic, JBoss and Tomcat must spend considerably more effort finding all the right tuning variables. In these products the monitoring data is scattered across multiple locations in the Admin GUIs or worse – only available for custom JMX programs

37. 37

38. 38 IBM Monitoring and Diagnostic Tools for Java - Health Center Health Center is a diagnostic tool for monitoring the status of a running JVM. It uses a small amount of processor time and memory, and can open some log and trace files for analysis: • Monitoring a running Java application or recorded activity for offline analysis • Very low performance overhead allows to connect to and monitor a live Java application (or replay recorded activity), such as CPU, environment, IO, gc, locking, threads, memory, method tracing with timings, etc. • Save data from a monitored Java application, then reload the saved data later on, without making a live connection. You can load data from multiple files by loading one file, then appending more files. • Viewing the data collected • Displays the data collected using different views (graphical and tabular) • Triggering dumps • Trigger the JVM to generate System Dumps, Heap Dumps, and Java Dumps • Troubleshooting • The first step in troubleshooting is to view the log files that are produced by the Health Center client and agent. Then read the information provided for some of the common problems that you might encounter. • Performance hints • The Health Center agent has little effect on performance. You can improve the performance of the Health Center client by reducing the amount of data collected or displayed. • You can use the Health Center API to write your own code for manipulating Health Center data

39. 39

40. 40

41. 41 Find performance problems fast • Which request is slow? Which is hung? Why? • Slow servlet requests are detected and a full diagnostic of the request is dumped to the log • Hung servlet requests are detected, triggering creation of a set of javacores • Use in your production environments to catch issues the first time they occur TRAS0112W: Request websphere.servlet.service|DayTrader Web | TradeScenarioServlet(AAC9KLwFFXT_AAAAAAAAAAN) has been running on thread 0000006b for 1549.460ms. The following stack trace shows what this thread is currently doing. <stack trace> The following table shows the events that have run during this request. Duration Operation 1552.012ms + websphere.servlet.service | DayTrader Web | TradeScenarioServlet 0.014ms websphere.session.getAttribute | R-ObCtcDfR8Zd9riQEMCh6R | uidBean 30.714ms websphere.servlet.service | DayTrader Web | TradeAppServlet 0.010ms websphere.session.getAttribute | R-ObCtcDfR8Zd9riQEMCh6R | uidBean 30.456ms websphere.servlet.service | DayTrader Web | /quote.jsp 28.903ms websphere.servlet.service | DayTrader Web | /displayQuote.jsp 0.194ms websphere.datasource.psExecuteQuery | jdbc/TradeDataSource | SELECT t0.CHANGE1, t0.COMPANYNAME.. 1520.695ms + websphere.servlet.service | DayTrader Web | TradeAppServlet 0.013ms websphere.session.getAttribute | R-ObCtcDfR8Zd9riQEMCh6R | uidBean 0.190ms websphere.datasource.psExecuteQuery | jdbc/TradeDataSource | SELECT t0.ADDRESS, t0.CREDITCARD, ... 0.135ms websphere.datasource.psExecuteQuery | jdbc/TradeDataSource | SELECT t0.ACCOUNTID, t0.BALANCE, ... ... Dramatically reduce the time it takes to diagnose the source of slow requests Problem Determination: Request Timing feature <requestTiming slowRequestThreshold="10s“ hungRequestThreshold="600s" includeContextInfo="true" sampleRate="1" /> JBoss and Tomcat do not provide similar capability => increased admin labor for troubleshooting

42. 42 Problem Determination: Event Logging feature Track events running in your Liberty applications • How do I know what events are happening in the server and how long do they take? • Create log entries for any Servlet or JDBC request, or HTTP get/set attribute operation • Use with minimum duration setting to watch for slow events in production environments • Use with all events enabled to show what apps are doing in development and test • For best performance use binary logging of Liberty and increase sample rate to >1 Servlets: [6/18/14 16:21:35:761 IST] 0000002a EventLoggingProbeExtension.class I BEGIN requestID=AAADvUHkFwy-AAAAAAAAAAD # type=websphere.servlet.service # contextInfo=com.ibm.ws.request.timing.TestJDBC [6/18/14 16:22:04:643 IST] 0000002a EventLoggingProbeExtension.class I END requestID=AAADvUHkFwy-AAAAAAAAAAD # type=websphere.servlet.service # contextInfo=com.ibm.ws.request.timing.TestJDBC # duration=2.614ms JDBC requests: [6/18/14 16:21:43:727 IST] 0000002a EventLoggingProbeExtension.class I BEGIN requestID=AAADvUHkFwy-AAAAAAAAAAD # type=websphere.datasource.executeUpdate # contextInfo=jdbc/exampleDS | create table cities (name varchar(50) not null, population int, county varchar(30)) [6/18/14 16:21:44:200 IST] 0000002a EventLoggingProbeExtension.class I END requestID=AAADvUHkFwy-AAAAAAAAAAD # type=websphere.datasource.executeUpdate # contextInfo=jdbc/exampleDS | create table cities (name varchar(50) not null, population int, county varchar(30)) # duration=0.231ms Know what's happening in your applications Servlet events include servlet name, path info, query string JDBC events include datasource and SQL JBoss and Tomcat do not provide similar capability => increased admin labor for troubleshooting

43. 43 Previews of technologies that allow you to write engaging and responsive enterprise business applications Integrated Analytics  Ease of Problem Determination to ensure high availability of your app- infrastructure Intelligent Management  Additional scenarios for auto scaling Liberty server scaling: provisioning of new server instances to available host machines WebRTC  Write rich, real time multimedia apps (voice and video) on web without requiring plug-ins, downloads or installs. Strong industry support. Enables contextual communications! Java Batch++  Ease of managing jobs through GUI tools & support for industry leading Enterprise Schedulers e.g. Nightly credit-card processing, bank reconciliation statements, payroll…. Also available as a Docker container: https://registry.hub.docker.com/_/websphere-liberty/ What’s in WAS Liberty Beta

44. 44 Documentation – order of magnitude difference in quality InfoCenter – world class, up to date Redbooks – unique and comprehensive developerWorks - implementation tips ISA – electronic support search tool 3rd party – sites, blogs, etc. User forums – self help JBoss docs – limited and inconsistent, lags in time JBoss wikis – lots of old confusing info User forums – no longer actively monitored by developers Similar quality issues with Tomcat documentation

45. 45 WAS deployment options On-Premises Public IaaS Public PaaS Do It Yourself Business as usual (can use with IBM UrbanCode Deploy, Chef, Puppet, etc.) BYOL or pay by the hour on SoftLayer, Azure, Amazon EC2 (can use with IBM UrbanCode Deploy, Chef, Puppet) Liberty Buildpack for 3rd party PaaS (Cloud Foundry, OpenShift) PureApplication System PureApplication System appliance, or PureApplication Software (BYOH) n/a PureApp System on the SoftLayer or 3rd party cloud BlueMix BlueMix Local n/a BlueMix Shared, or BlueMix Dedicated or WaaS

46. 46 Cloud Integration Build hybrid environments. Connect to on- premises systems of record plus other public and private clouds. Expose your own APIs to your developers. Extend SaaS Apps CloudFoundry based PaaS from IBM Run Your Apps The developer can chose any language runtime or bring their own. Just upload your code and go. DevOps Development, testing, monitoring, deployment and logging tools allow the developer to run the entire application APIs and Services A catalog of open source, IBM and third party APIs services allow a developer to stitch together an application in minutes. Drop in SaaS App SDKs and extend to new use cases (e.g,. Mobile, Analytics, Web) IBM BlueMix

47. 47 Easily deploy, manage and move enterprise applications without change across Hybrid clouds • New support for Docker and Chef with Patterns for 10x faster deployments and scaling, workload portability and access to pre-built applications • Enhanced security and performance for data and application access across hybrid environments • New support for bring your own hardware and enhanced support for off- premises cloud environments to seamlessly deploy and manage enterprise applications without changes (with PureApplication Software) PureApplication Appliance SoftLayer BYOH IBM PureApplication Platform

48. 48 A hybrid cloud application platform for cloud enabling applications and middleware with enterprise-grade qualities of service • WAS • DB2 • Oracle • MQ • IIB Automated elasticity Multi-site deployment High availability Disaster recovery Monitoring License management Intelligent placement Centralized logging Security Over 200 patterns including: • Portal • BPM • Cognos • DataPower • MobileFirst + any Red Hat/Windows/AIX software Seamlessly deploy & move workloads between on & off-premises without change: • PureApplication System • PureApplication Service • PureApplication Software

49. 49 IBM Pattern Engine Virtual Application Builder Drag assets onto the canvas to define application and related resources Define cross-component links and add policies; respond to warning messages to build well-formed applications Specify configuration details for components, policies, and links These patterns can run on-premise or on the IBM SoftLayer cloud

50. 50 IBM PureApplication System business value 9612 hrs Deployment Change Management Security Management Asset Management Incident/capacity Mgmt 0 10000 5000 Do It Yourself PureApplication System Pre-integrated Competitor Coalition Competitor 5815 hrs 153%More 4843 hrs 110%More Labor Hours Spent* 2302 hrs *Note: Coalition competitor used 9 competitor blades (144 cores). Pre-Integrated competitor used 18 pre-integrated nodes (288 cores). IBM PureApplication System used 3 nodes (96 cores). Each system has the capacity to run 72 workloads where each workload can sustain a peak throughput of 1720 page elements per second. The labor savings and assumptions herein are estimates based on a labor model that uses data obtained on the percentage of time customers spend on certain IT life cycle tasks. It is not a benchmark. As such, actual customer results will vary based on customer applications, differences in stack deployed and other systems variations as well as actual configuration, applications, specific queries and other variables in a production environment. 76%Savings How does PureApplication System do this? - pre-integrated management - patterns of expertise

51. 51 WebSphere Full Profile secure system administration Configurator All Monitor rights plus can make configuration changes Operator All Monitor rights plus can make runtime changes Monitor Can monitor configuration and runtime state but cannot change them Administrator Can monitor and change configuration and runtime state Operator + Configurator + Monitor rights Deployer All Configurator plus Operator rights plus can deploy projects AdminSecurityManager Allows for assignment of user roles and other security related tasks JBoss has limited support for role separation (80%) JBoss does not support resource separation

52. 52 Fine-grained Administrative Security Key Features: • Users can be defined with administrative roles on specific resources: • Cells, node groups, nodes, clusters, servers, and applications • Administrative Console will be filtered by user’s administrative role • User cannot access any other resources outside assigned resources Isolate administrators from each other and according to access levels to improve security and governance JBoss and Tomcat do not provide similar capabilities

53. 53 “ ” Before… … and after Invention of “Autopilot”Airplane controls circa 1940 Home grown wsadmin scripts or “human eyes and hands” WAS ND Intelligent Management

54. 54 WebSphere Intelligent Management Intelligent Routing and SLA Enforcement Application Edition Management Better TCO through management efficiency and performance, Intelligent Management delivers the ability to sense and respond quickly to changes Up to 45% less hardware Source: Based on 60+ Operations Optimization Value Assessments done to date by IBM for real customers Cost reductions are compared to traditional WAS ND deployment Server Health Management SLA based Dynamic Clustering Up to 90% fewer outages Up to 60% less administration Up to 45% less software

55. 55 Applications can be upgraded or downgraded without incurring outages or requiring additional hardware and license costs Validation Mode Rollout Policies Concurrent Activation Application Edition Management • Upgrade Applications without interruption to end users • Concurrently run multiple editions of an application • Automatically route users to a specific application • Multiple editions can be activated for extended periods of time • Rollout policies to switch from one edition to another without service loss • Easily update OS or WebSphere without incurring down time • Easy-to-use edition control center in admin console • Full scripting support StockTrading 1.0 StockTrading 2.0 StockTrading 3.0

56. 56 WAS ND Liberty WAS ND classic Oracle WLS EE JBoss EAP Apache Tomcat Hot application update with interruption Yes Yes Yes Yes no Sequential interruption free update of a compatible app no Yes Yes Yes no Sequential interruption free update of an incompatible app no Yes Yes no no Atomic update of an app no Yes no no no Previous app editions can be activated from history no Yes no no no Run 2 editions of the same app concurrently no Yes Yes no no Run app in validation mode while the other edition is running no Yes no no no Run 3 or more editions of the same app concurrently no no no no no Application deployment in a clustered environment • Out of the box function of the products in a multi-server environment is shown • Most of this function can be achieved with all of the servers with enough work put into a home grown script or automation framework

57. 57 Sense and respond to problems before end users suffer an outage Comprehensive Health Policies Customizable Health Conditions Customizable Health Actions 57 Health Management • Automatically detect and handle application health problems • Without requiring administrator time, expertise, or intervention • Intelligently handle health issues in a way that will maintain continuous availability • Each health policy consists of a condition, one or more actions, and a target set of processes • Includes health policies for common application problems • Customizable health conditions and health actions JBoss does not provide similar administrative capabilities

58. 58 Helps mitigate common health problems before outages occur Health Conditions • Excessive request timeouts: % of timed out requests • Excessive response time: average response time • Excessive garbage collection: % of time spent in GCs • Excessive memory: % of maximum JVM heap size • Age-based: amount of time server has been running • Memory leak: JVM heap size after garbage collection • Storm drain: significant drop in response time • Workload: total number of requests • Health policies can be defined for common server health conditions • When a health policy's condition is true, corrective action execute automatically or require approval • Notify administrator (send email or SNMP trap) • Capture diagnostics (generate heap dump, java core) • Restart server • Excessive response time means you are monitoring what matters most: your customer's experience! • Application server restarts are done in a way that prevent outages and service policy violations • Each health policy can be in supervise or automatic mode. Supervise mode is like training wheels to allow you to verify that a health policy does what you want before making it automatic. Health Management – Health Policies

59. 59 Flexibility to determine what an “unhealthy” condition is…  Custom expressions can be built which use metrics from: • The On Demand Router, URI return codes • PMI metrics, MBean operations and attributes • Examples: hung thread detection, DB connection pool exhaustion or slow down  Complex boolean expressions using a mix of operands is supported (AND, OR, NOT) Health Management – Custom Health Conditions

60. 60 Provides flexibility by allowing the definition of custom actions allowing administrators to define an action plan to be carried out when the unhealthy situation detected. Health Management – Custom Health Actions

61. 61 • Easily allows an administrator to specify the relative importance of applications and optionally a response time goal. WebSphere then manages your applications according to this policy. • Service policies are used to define application service level goals • Allow workloads to be classified, prioritized and intelligently routed • Enables application performance monitoring • Resource adjustments are made if needed to consistently achieve service policies Service Policies define the relative importance and response time goals of application services; defined in terms the end user result the customer wishes to achieve What is a Service Policy?

62. 62 WAS ND classic1 WAS ND Liberty2 WAS ND + Data Power AO8 Oracle WLS EE Traffic Director & Exalogic7 JBoss EAP + EWP Apache HTTP + Tomcat High performance some some Yes some some some some WLM across static app server clusters Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes SSL termination and HTTP compression Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Auto updates of configuration when cluster or app change Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes no9 JVM maintenance mode Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes no no Node (or host) maintenance mode Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes no no Application edition-aware routing Yes no Yes Yes Yes no no Dynamic clusters auto-grow or shrink based on workload Yes Yes Yes no no no no Health policy support Yes Yes Yes no no no no Auto-adjusts server weights based on resource use Yes no Yes no Yes no no Traffic shaping and SLA enforcement for HTTP Yes no Yes no Yes no no CPU and heap overload protection Yes no Yes no no no no Support traffic shaping for 3rd party servers Yes no Yes no no no no Custom rules for request routing (URI, IP address, etc.) Yes no Yes no Yes no no Request rate limiting no no Yes no some no no Number of client connections limiting no no Yes no Yes no no Content based routing no no Yes no some no no Protect against XML and SQL injection attacks no no Yes no no no no XML processing (parsing, transformation, validation, etc.) no no Yes no no no no Custom advisors no no Yes no no no no DMZ ready Yes5 Yes Yes no no Yes Yes Static file serving and in-memory and disk page caching Yes3 Yes3 no no4 Yes Yes Yes Replace hardware based load balancer(s) Yes6 Yes6 Yes no some no no Traffic shaping and SLA enforcement for IIOP and JMS Yes no no no no no no HTTP session rebalancing Yes no no no no no no Intelligent routing

63. 63 Maximum heap utilization protects against OutOfMemory exceptions Maximum CPU utilization protects against various failures which occur when CPU is consumed Rejects excess traffic without affinity when overload occurs Overload Protection

64. 64 WAS ND classic WAS ND Liberty Oracle WLS EE JBoss EAP Apache Tomcat Static clusters (pre-provisioned) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Manually add or remove servers to/from a running cluster Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Centralized management of cluster members Yes Yes Yes Yes no Dynamically creates/starts/stops servers when load changes Yes Yes no no no Provisions new app servers to hosts when workload increases Yes Yes no no no Scaling policy allows for min and max number of servers Yes Yes no no no Scaling policy based on CPU, heap or memory use Yes Yes no no no Scaling based on service policies (URL + response time, etc.) Yes no no no no Applications have relative priorities when servers are allocated Yes no no no no Auto vertical stacking on a node Yes no no no no Cluster isolation groups Yes no no no no Lazy application start Yes no no no no Dynamic clustering (auto scaling)

65. 65 Dynamic clustering WAS ND classic WLS EE New node is added to a cell If node meets the dynamic selection criteria, it is automatically added to the dynamic cluster as potential host for the JVM Static cluster member must be manually defined for each participating node and manually added to the static cluster. Vertical stacking (VS) If VS is allowed, JVM process definitions are automatically created for each node Cluster members must be manually created and port conflict resolution must be manually done for each new JVM Cluster isolation Dynamic cluster can belong to different isolation groups and conflicts are automatically resolved Manual work is required to prevent conflicts between JVMs that must be isolated from each other Workload increase If workload increases for the application, new members of dynamic cluster are started to accommodate such increased workload Manual start of cluster members is required to accommodate increase in workload Workload decrease When workload drops off, members of dynamic clusters may be stopped if CPU or memory are required for other workloads. Lazy application start can be configured Manual stop of instances is required to free up resources for other workloads. Application must always be up and running to accept workload Critical load and resource shortage When overall workload is greater than the system can handle, service policies are enforced such that more important applications get priority over less important ones and SLA policies for response times are met. SLAs can be defined based on a rule set based on URI, time, user properties, IP, etc. No provision for prioritization of workload, no SLAs for applications. Typical solution is to create duplication by using dedicated hosts (physical or virtual) for each workload, which increases admin complexity, hardware and software cost Server properties Server template can be updated and changes are reflected on all members of dynamic cluster automatically Properties must be updated on each member of the static cluster manually

66. 66 Dynamic clustering WAS ND JBoss EAP New node is added to a cell If node meets the dynamic selection criteria, it is automatically added to the dynamic cluster as potential host for the JVM Static cluster member must be manually defined for each participating node and manually added to the static cluster. Vertical stacking (VS) If VS is allowed, JVM process definitions are automatically created for each node Cluster members must be manually created and port conflict resolution must be manually done for each new JVM Cluster isolation Dynamic cluster can belong to different isolation groups and conflicts are automatically resolved Manual work is required to prevent conflicts between JVMs that must be isolated from each other Workload increase If workload increases for the application, new members of dynamic cluster are started to accommodate such increased workload Manual start of cluster members is required to accommodate increase in workload Workload decrease When workload drops off, members of dynamic clusters may be stopped if CPU or memory are required for other workloads. Lazy application start can be configured Manual stop of instances is required to free up resources for other workloads. Application must always be up and running to accept workload Critical load and resource shortage When overall workload is greater than the system can handle, service policies are enforced such that more important applications get priority over less important ones and SLA policies for response times are met. SLAs can be defined based on a rule set based on URI, time, user properties, IP, etc. No provision for prioritization of workload, no SLAs for applications. Typical solution is to create duplication by using dedicated hosts (physical or virtual) for each workload, which increases admin complexity, hardware and software cost Server properties Server template can be updated and changes are reflected on all members of dynamic cluster automatically Properties must be updated on each member of the static cluster manually

67. 67 The On Demand Router applies sophisticated classification and flow control algorithms to intelligently manage workload WebSphere On Demand Router (ODR) Classification Prioritization and Flow Control Routing and Load Balancing Placement Executions Node 2 Node 3 Node 4 Node 5 Placement DecisionsWebSphere Decision Makers Application Demand Resource State Routing, Health and Service Policies Node 1 Intelligent Management Scenario

68. 68 68 Proactively provision and start or stop application servers based on workload demands to meet Service Level Agreements Dynamic Clustering  Associate service policies with your applications • Let WebSphere manage to the service goals  Programmatically respond to spikes in demand • Add or reduce application server instances as appropriate  Automatically recover from infrastructure problems  Includes automatic start and stop of cluster members based on load for MQ-driven applications  Decrease administrative overhead required to monitor and diagnose performance issues

69. 69 Lazy Application Start • Dynamic Clusters support a min and max number of running cluster members • If the “stop all instances” option is enabled, the min is 0, which means:  The application may not be running in the pool anywhere  When a request is received, a cluster member is started  When the application goes idle all clusters members are stopped  This allows low volume applications to be available without consuming resources.  A customizable On Demand Router error page with meta-refresh provides a user-friendly customer experience

70. 70 Application Edition Management Before Application Edition Management 1 Stop application servers 2 Uninstall old version of application 3 Install new version of application 4 Replicate application changes to all nodes 5 Start application servers Application is unavailable from step 1 through 5 To revert to old version of application, repeat all steps, reversing “old” and “new” ... thus another long outage With Application Edition Management 1 Install new edition of application 2 Replicate application changes to all nodes 3 Roll out new edition of application Application remains available to end users throughout the update process To revert to old version of application, simply rollback the old edition Eliminate down-time for managed applications

71. 71 Application Edition Management Administrative Console - Edition Control Center

72. 72 Memory leak detection & Protection in WAS WebSphere Application Server V8.5: • Ability to mitigate memory leak when stopping apps • Ability to prevent leaks, receive leak warnings and get heap/system dumps • MBean to list stopped apps that have memory leaks 72 Reduce possibilities of memory leak in your applications Get enough info. if leak is detected to help fix my app List stopped apps that have memory leaks

73. 73 The history of Red Hat and JBoss messaging JBoss AS v3 2002 2006 JBossMQ JBoss AS v5 JBoss Messaging 2009 JBoss AS 6 HornetQ 2013 JBoss XQ ActiveMQ Red Hat MRG2008 Apache Qpid * - New Red Hat “strategic” messaging is described to be a REWRITE and a combination of “best ideas” from Apache Qpid + Red Hat HornetQ + Apache ActiveMQ 2015 NEW* ? ?

74. 74 Platforms support WAS 8.5.5.7 WebLogic 12.2.1 JBoss EAP 6.4 tc Server X86 Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5, 6, 7 6, 7 6, 7 6, 7 Asianux 3 no no no Ubuntu 12, 14 no no Dev Oracle Linux no 6, 7 no no Mac OS Liberty Dev. no Dev SuSe Linux ES 10, 11, 12 11 no V11 Windows 7+, 2008+ 2012 2008+ 2008 Solaris 10, 11 11 11 no RISC Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5, 6, 7 6 7 no SuSe Linux ES 10, 11, 12 11 no no Ubuntu 14 no no no AIX 6, 7 7 no no IBM I 6, 7 no no no HP-UX 11i v2, v3 11i v3 11i v3 no Inspur K-UX (Itanium) 2.1 no no no Solaris (SPARC) 10, 11 11 11 no z/Series Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5, 6, 7 6 no no SuSe Linux ES 10, 11, 12 11 no no z/OS 1, 2 no no no

75. 75 WAS 8.5.5.7 WLS 12.2.1 Oracle 11g, 12c 11g, 12c Microsoft SQL 2008, 2012 2008, 2012 Sybase 15 15 IBM DB2 9, 10 9, 10 IBM DB2 for iSeries 6, 7 no IBM DB2 for z/OS 9, 10, 11 no IBM Informix DS 11, 12 no Apache Derby 10.8 no MySQL no 5 (no XA) Why do I care? IBM offers more choices and allow to pick the right product for the right job, which often can reduce the cost of computing. Database certifications

76. 76 Zero migration by design • Why upgrade? • Gain new APIs in a new Java EE level, stay on a supported version of the Application Server, protect against security vulnerabilities, gain speed by moving to the faster new version of JDK or newer hardware • How easy is it to upgrade? Does it cost a fortune? • Liberty implements Zero Migration by design • There is no migration needed for Liberty configuration - the same server configurations can be used with different versions and service levels • Existing features will not change behavior, new feature ‘versions’ will be added and will contain all updates and changes • Tomcat and tc Server require considerable migration effort • Fresh server install and careful configuration updates and testing are required • No automated upgrade or migration tool is provided • JBoss is not backwards compatible and migration is a pain • Backwards compatibility was broken between JBoss v3.x, v4.x, v5, v6. Each of these releases have been disruptive and changed many properties and configuration files, scripting commands, CLI, Admin UI, APIs, etc. Upgrade path for JBoss is to manually copy configuration files and applications to new installation. • These issues result in increased administration costs when using JBoss because of lost productivity related to unnecessary software development.

77. 77

78. 78 Considerations for moving off WAS What do you expect to gain from switching? What is the exact criteria to measure if it was a viable move? Moving applications from WAS to JBoss will involve significant effort and cost, including: • Training for operations team • Migration of operational scripts and documentation • Validate the operational characteristics of JBoss • Building missing functions in JBoss • Purchase additional hardware capacity • Purchase more licenses for JBoss • Security • Additional license costs • Unreliable messaging in JBoss • Lack of dynamic clustering and SLA management in JBoss • There are many other capabilities included with WAS that JBoss does not provide See speaker notes for details

79. 79 WebSphere Application Server Migration Toolkit • No Charge plugins for Eclipse and RAD Rule sets for multiple source / destination combinations (e.g. WLS->WAS, etc.): (a) The tool scans Java source code, JSP files and deployment descriptors and identifies the changes required (allows for Java upgrade also). (b) The tool scans server configuration files (looking for Datasources, servers, JMS settings, etc.) and generates appropriate Liberty or WAS configuration. In most cases the toolkit is capable of making the application changes itself. After the “scan” and “conversion” are done the toolkit generates report on the results of the migration and any manual migration tasks (if required). • Free migration RedBook and developerWorks articles on migration • No Charge Migration Assessment Workshop for qualified customers Now easier then ever before to migrate your applications to WebSphere Application Server (1) Liberty Profile or (2) WAS v7, v8, v8.5, v8.5.5 WebSphere Migration Toolkit (Eclipse and RAD plugins) WAS 5.1 – 8.x WebLogic Oracle OC4J (OAS) Tomcat IBM migration tools and offerings: http://whywebsphere.com/?s=migration (a) Java, JSP source and DDs (b) Server configuration objects JBoss new

80. 80 WebSphere Application Server Migration Toolkit The Migration tool in action… Analysis Type Rule Categories Rule Result Options Rule Results Analysis History Analysis Results Help Contents

81. 81 WebSphere Application Server Migration Toolkit

82. 82 WebSphere Application Server Migration Toolkit and Tomcat plus Liberty Technology Preview plugins From To Liberty Config Migration Liberty Application Migration WAS Config Migration WAS Application Migration JBoss 4.X – 5.x  Liberty 8.5.5 or CloudFoundry / Bluemix Java EE5 and prior versions  Liberty 8.5.5 or CloudFoundry / Bluemix 4.X – 5.x  7.0 - 8.5.5 Java EE5 and prior versions  7.0 – 8.5.5 Tomcat 7.X  Liberty 8.5.5 6.0 or 7.0  Liberty 8.5.5 or CloudFoundry / Bluemix N/A 6.0 or 7.0  7.0 - 8.5.5 WebLogic 6.X – 11.x  Liberty 8.5.5 or CloudFoundry / Bluemix Java EE5 and prior versions  Liberty 8.5.5 or CloudFoundry / Bluemix 6.X – 11.x  7.0 - 8.5.5 Java EE5 and prior versions  7.0 – 8.5.5 OAS N/A Java EE5 and prior versions  Liberty 8.5.5 or CloudFoundry / Bluemix N/A Java EE5 and prior versions  7.0 – 8.5.5 WAS N/A 7.0 - 8.5.5  Liberty 8.5.5 or CloudFoundry / Bluemix N/A 5.1 – 8.x  7.0 - 8.5.5 Java (JDK) N/A 1.4, 5.0, 6.0  6.0 or 7.0 N/A 1.4, 5.0, 6.0  6.0 or 7.0

83. 83 Capitalizing on Intelligent App Server Management Base Application Server • Programming Model • QoS • Security •Administration Server Server Server Server Server Server Server Server Job Manager • Control multiple endpoints • Remote management • Loose Coupling Network Deployment Cell •Administration •Clustering •Workload Management WebSphere Application Server Server Server Server Server Server Server Server Admin Agent Admin Agent Admin Agent Deployment Mgr Deployment Mgr Read more details here: http://smarterquestions.org/2012/01/comparison-of-automation-tools-for-large-scale-websphere-weblogic-and-jboss-topologies Low cost administration of massive remote or local installations

84. 84

85. 85 JBoss Operations Network Number of stability issues and bugs remain open. Tool is not mature enough to be used in full production

86. 86 Administration and Configuration with WebSphere is Easier: Cluster Configuration WAS ND 8.5 has a UI tc Server 2.8.1: Hand-edited XML Hand-editing XML files leaves no audit trail for changes! Cluster Configuration

87. 87 Management options Pros Cons Manual editing of files • Easy to understand • Best for development use • Not reliable – user can make typos and break configuration, leading to costly outages • Time consuming when managing more than 1 server • No auditing, limited security • Not recommended for production Administrative GUI • Easy to understand • Auditing and security provided • Configuration consistency checks • Some group operations supported • Best for development use • Often requires repetition of commands to be applied to multiple servers • Despite configuration consistency checks and input validation, manual keystrokes and mouse clicks may lead to errors and downtime in production • Not recommended for production Command Line Script • Repeatable and predictable (no user input is needed, no typos, no wrong mouse clicks) • Can automate management of large configurations by iterating over resource lists (no need to manually repeat steps) • Best for production use • Can be difficult to learn and master • High overhead for development use

88. 88 Why choose Liberty over JBoss EAP? • Reduced development costs and more agile smaller runtime • Liberty offers full Java EE 7 certified runtime, JBoss EAP is Java EE 6 • Integrated security options • Liberty provides multiple security options and avoids security risks of open source (like Heartbleed bug) • Lower hosting costs than JBoss EAP • Higher throughput on each server means fewer resources are needed to support the same workload on Liberty (Liberty throughput is 30% higher than JBoss on native OS and up to 2.1x better on 4 Docker Container topology) • Lower license and support costs with Liberty Core and Base • Operational capabilities and QOS • Cluster auto scaling, soon new Intelligent Mgmt features, dynamic configuration updates • Painless V2V migration • Put all your development effort on new function, not migration • Application fidelity between Liberty and WAS • Fast low cost startup and easy growth on IBM hosted cloud • Bluemix public for instant environments • Seamless growth to Bluemix dedicated/local and IaaS Clouds • World class IBM support • Liberty Core edition is free to embed and ship in ISV products (optional $ support) • IBM ships & supports entire stack – from JVM and app server, to HTTP, LDAP, etc. • Blue Diamond support option in North America for enhanced data privacy

89. 89 Why choose Liberty over Tomcat and TomEE? • Faster development cycle / reduced development costs • Users who move application development from Tomcat to Liberty report 20-25% increase in development efficiency • Liberty offers full Java EE 7 certified runtime, Tomcat is only JSP/Servlet engine • Integrated security options • Liberty provides multiple security options and avoids security risks of open source (like Heartbleed bug) • Lower hosting costs than Tomcat • Higher throughput on each server means fewer resources are needed to support the same workload on Liberty (Liberty throughput is 34% higher than Tomcat on native OS and 2.4x better than Tomcat on 4 Docker Container topology) • Operational capabilities and QOS • Admin center, cluster auto scaling, dynamic routing updates, soon new Intelligent Mgmt features, transaction management, JMS messaging, dynamic configuration updates • Painless V2V migration • Put all your development effort on new function, not migration • Application fidelity between Liberty and WAS • Fast low cost startup and easy growth on IBM hosted cloud • Bluemix public for instant environments • Seamless growth to Bluemix dedicated/local and IaaS Clouds • World class IBM support • Liberty Core edition is free to embed and ship in ISV products (optional $ support) • IBM ships & supports entire stack – from JVM and app server, to HTTP, LDAP, etc. • Blue Diamond support option in North America for enhanced data privacy

90. 90 Financial Considerations TCA vs. TCO ( )f=

91. 91 Cloud support? Standards support and programming model? Monitoring and diagnostic tools?Management and administration? High availability and reliability?Performance and scalability? User and administrative security? Minimize License and support cost (TCA)? OS and DB support? Documentation and best practices? PaaS? Minimize TCO Time to market?

92. 92 Average cost of downtime per industry Industry segment Cost per Hour (Millions) Energy $ 2.8 Telecommunications $ 2.1 Manufacturing $ 1.6 Financial $ 1.5 Information Technology $ 1.4 Insurance $ 1.2 Retail $ 1.1 Pharmaceuticals $ 1.1 Banking $ 1.0 Consumer Products $ 0.8 Chemicals $ 0.7 Transportation $ 0.7 Sources: ITG Value Proposition for Siebel Enterprise Applications, Business case for IBM System z & Robert Frances Group &*^$#@ ??? Zzzzzzz….

93. 93 <10%• Software license & subscription costs1 • Hardware and networking costs • Downtime costs (planned and unplanned) • Upgrades cost • SLA penalties • Deployment cost • Operational support cost (day to day operations) • Performance costs • Cost of selection of the vendor software • Requirements analysis cost • Developer, admin and end-user training cost • Application design and development costs • Cost of integration with other systems • Quality, user acceptance and other testing costs • Application enhancements and bug fixes cost • Replacement costs • Cost of other risks (including security breaches) 90% (1) Source: http://bit.ly/1yH5oKZ

94. 94 Free like in beer •NO CHARGE WebSphere Developer Tools for Eclipse •NO CHARGE WAS for Developers & Liberty Profile Available at no charge for the developer desktop/laptop – free license + free support for those who have production licenses, and optional fee based support for those who don’t •NO CHARGE production runtime – Liberty Core for ISVs ISV’s customers can run the app on Liberty Core free of charge without support •NO CHARGE production – Liberty for up to 1GB on BlueMix Liberty instance for test or production running non-stop •NO CHARGE production runtime – Liberty for up to 2 GB Any number of instances, so long as sum total Java heap is <=2GB

95. 95 Flexible licensing options to suit customer needs • JBoss, tc Server do not have socket, or per user pricing • tc Server, WebLogic and JBoss do not have On-Demand per day pricing • Consider retail chain with 100s of locations. WAS user based license for Liberty Core or Express can be orders of magnitude less than JBoss or tc Server See additional notes about these pricing options here: http://whywebsphere.com/2013/09/26/software-costs Core (PVU) Socket 20 users Unlimited license 1 hour (cloud) 1 day (Power) 1 month (PVU) 1 month (socket) 1 year (PVU) WAS Liberty Core 28.25$ n/a 709$ BYOL 25.50$ 1.18$ n/a 11.40$ WAS Express 28.25$ n/a 709$ BYOL 25.42$ 1.18$ n/a 11.40$ WAS Base 57.00$ 14,500$ n/a 0.53$ 51.09$ 2.38$ 604$ 22.80$ WAS ND 214.00$ n/a n/a 1.11$ 191.67$ 8.90$ n/a 88.25$ Pay as you go Contact IBM Perpetual licenses

96. 96 License cost calculator, blog and video • WAS vs. WLS: http://bit.ly/1JZFy8V • WAS vs. JBoss: http://bit.ly/22aOKkz

97. 97 48 53 58 72 58 43 38 48 62 96 384 144 Example of the use of monthly term license Workload distribution example over calendar year (hypothetical) Servers are 2 sockets, 12 cores each Numberofcores JBoss subscription licenses: 384=16*24 JBoss 5 year cost = $1.44M WAS perpetual licenses: 8 sockets WAS monthly licenses: 336 IBM 5 year cost = $283K For applications that have uneven workloads over the year the cost of WAS could be minimized by purchasing “pay as you go” licenses for peak periods

98. 98 48 53 58 72 58 43 38 48 62 96 384 144 Example of the use of monthly term license Workload distribution example over calendar year (hypothetical) Servers are 2 sockets, 12 cores each Numberofcores Oracle perpetual licenses: 384=16*24 Oracle 5 year cost = $3.44M WAS perpetual licenses: 8 sockets WAS monthly licenses: 336 IBM 5 year cost = $283K For applications that have uneven workloads over the year the cost of WAS could be minimized by purchasing “pay as you go” licenses for peak periods

99. 99 WAS license + support cost over 5 and 10 years is lower And it gets better… See additional notes about these pricing options here: http://whywebsphere.com/2013/09/26/software-costs Without required components With LDAP, JDK and HTTP 5 years 10 years 5 years 10 years WAS JBoss EAP WAS JBoss EAP WAS JBoss EAP WAS JBoss EAP 4 1 4 50 x86 $61,560 $90,000 $95,760 $180,000 $61,560 $211,875 $95,760 $423,750 4 1 6 50 x86 $78,300 $90,000 $121,800 $180,000 $78,300 $253,125 $121,800 $506,250 4 1 8 50 x86 $78,300 $135,000 $121,800 $270,000 $78,300 $335,625 $121,800 $671,250 4 1 12 50 x86 $78,300 $180,000 $121,800 $360,000 $78,300 $468,750 $121,800 $937,500 4 1 16 50 x86 $78,300 $270,000 $121,800 $540,000 $78,300 $637,500 $121,800 $1,275,000 4 2 4 70 x86 $156,600 $135,000 $243,600 $270,000 $156,600 $335,625 $243,600 $671,250 4 2 6 70 x86 $156,600 $180,000 $243,600 $360,000 $156,600 $468,750 $243,600 $937,500 4 2 8 70 x86 $156,600 $270,000 $243,600 $540,000 $156,600 $637,500 $243,600 $1,275,000 4 2 10 70 x86 $156,600 $315,000 $243,600 $630,000 $156,600 $766,875 $243,600 $1,533,750 4 2 12 70 x86 $156,600 $360,000 $243,600 $720,000 $156,600 $890,625 $243,600 $1,781,250 4 2 14 70 x86 $156,600 $450,000 $243,600 $900,000 $156,600 $1,102,500 $243,600 $2,205,000 4 2 16 70 x86 $156,600 $495,000 $243,600 $990,000 $156,600 $1,226,250 $243,600 $2,452,500 4 2 18 70 x86 $156,600 $540,000 $243,600 $1,080,000 $156,600 $1,359,375 $243,600 $2,718,750 4 4 6 100 x86 $313,200 $360,000 $487,200 $720,000 $313,200 $890,625 $487,200 $1,781,250 4 4 8 100 x86 $313,200 $495,000 $487,200 $990,000 $313,200 $1,226,250 $487,200 $2,452,500 4 4 10 100 x86 $313,200 $585,000 $487,200 $1,170,000 $313,200 $1,479,375 $487,200 $2,958,750 4 4 12 100 x86 $313,200 $720,000 $487,200 $1,440,000 $313,200 $1,781,250 $487,200 $3,562,500 4 4 14 100 x86 $313,200 $855,000 $487,200 $1,710,000 $313,200 $2,116,875 $487,200 $4,233,750 4 4 16 100 x86 $313,200 $945,000 $487,200 $1,890,000 $313,200 $2,370,000 $487,200 $4,740,000 4 4 18 100 x86 $313,200 $1,080,000 $487,200 $2,160,000 $313,200 $2,671,875 $487,200 $5,343,750 CPUtype #ofphysicalservers #socketsperserver #corespersocket IBMPVUrating

100. 100 License cost comparison of additional components for App Server WAS WAS ND JBoss EAP Management and monitoring Included Included Included (in “managed” bundles) JON configuration DBMS n/a n/a $6,900 / CPU / year (PostgreSQL) Hardware for the JON database n/a n/a ~ $15,000 + support (3rd party) Load Balancer Extra $ Included ~ $20,000 / device + support (3rd party) Dynamic content caching proxy Extra $ Included $2,500 / 16 cores / year (JBoss EWS) Page fragment & POJO caching Included Included ~ $1,000 / server / year (3rd party) HTTPSession persistence DBMS Included Included $6,900 / CPU / year (PostgreSQL) LDAP Included Included $9,000 / server / year (3rd party) JDK Included Included OpenJDK is supported on RHEL $5,000 / core (Oracle JDK) Troubleshooting tools Included Included $?,000 / year (3rd party) HTTP Server Included Included $2,500 / 16 cores / year (JBoss EWS) App Server Hardware $X $X $X + 30% (due to lower performance)

101. 101 Support policy for IBM vs. Red Hat • Fee based 24x7 Production support • all cores in production must be licensed • Fee based Non-Production • WAS, MQ, JBoss A-MQ, JBoss EAP must be licensed for non-production • See Red Hat subscription guide (details here) • Free Disaster Recovery • Cold and Warm Standby as well as DR servers are provided at no extra charge with IBM and Red Hat contacts (this is very unlike Oracle) • Free Development support • MQ, WAS for Developers (including Liberty) – unlimited developer support with at least one production license • JBoss A-MQ, JBoss EAP, etc. – up to 25 developers for each 16 cores of subscription for production support (see details here) • Number of production support contacts • IBM: unlimited • Red Hat: depends on the number of cores licensed: 2 contacts up to 32 cores, 4 contacts up to 64 cores, etc. up to 12 contacts for 192 cores (more details)

102. 102 Forrester case study 1: The Total Economic Impact To IBM WAS Migrating From An Open Source Environment  Case study of a US Government Agency  Migration of the JBoss production system to WebSphere Application Server yielded 44% three- year risk-adjusted ROI with payback period of 2 years

103. 103 Forrester case study 2: The Total Economic Impact of IBM WebSphere Application Server • Case study of a US based Fortune 100 company • Migration of the JBoss production system to WebSphere Application Server yielded 42% ROI and payback of 1.4 years • Primary benefits of migration • Improved administration • Greater application performance • Higher application availability • Reduced support costs • Improved development productivity

104. 104 Independent industry studies on software costs “Software maintenance and evolution is a considerably understudied area while taking into account its cost effects… Although there has not been much empirical research on this particular area, the magnitude of the maintenance cost effects is clearly identifiable. The relative cost for maintaining software and managing its evolution now represents more than 90% of its total cost. This is referred to as legacy crisis by Seacord et al. (2003).” Various studies on this subject are described in the table below: Year Proportion of software maintenance costs Definition Reference 2010 >81% Implementation, testing, management, tuning and other costs (all, but for procurement) Forrester Research (2010) 2000 >90% Software cost devoted to system maintenance & evolution / total software costs Erlikh (2000) 1993 75% Software maintenance / information system budget (in Fortune 1000 companies) Eastwood (1993) 1990 >90% Software cost devoted to system maintenance & evolution / total software costs Moad (1990) 1990 60-70% Software maintenance / total management information systems (MIS) operating budgets Huff (1990) 1988 60-70% Software maintenance / total management information systems (MIS) operating budgets Port (1988) 1984 65-75% Effort spent on software maintenance / total available software engineering effort. McKee (1984) 1981 >50% Staff time spent on maintenance / total time (in 487 organizations) Lientz & Swanson (1981) 1979 67% Maintenance costs / total software costs Zelkowitz et al. (1979) Source: http://archive.is/oBlIr

105. 105 Red Hat JBoss support metric

106. 106 TCO study: WAS ND 8.5 vs. JBoss EAP v6 Conclusion: JBoss is 35% more expensive over 5 years vs. WAS ND Source: Based on the study by Prolifics, December 2012 TCO Category IBM Red Hat RedHat as % of IBM Hardware $ 2,060,934 $ 3,114,308 151% Training $ 84,375 $ 171,998 204% Software License $ 2,623,920 $ - 0% Software Support $ 2,008,815 $ 1,821,316 91% Application Management $ 759,492 $ 2,570,500 338% Infrastructure Management $ 1,533,834 $ 2,301,566 150% Risk and Downtime $ - $ 2,268,548 n/a Total $ 9,071,370 $ 12,248,235 135%

107. 107 Cost of Development vs. the rest of the TCO  Financial Services company in the US (Multi-billion dollar business) • 5 years time horizon • 30 JEE applications • about 6 new apps built per year • 110 developers, approximate *loaded* cost is $145,000 per year • 24 servers (16 cores each, x86), approximate cost $23,000 plus support, power, cooling, etc. • Lesson learned • The cost of the IBM software is 4% of the TCO TCO Category 5 year cost Hardware $ 1,853,048 Training $ 1,115,625 Software Licenses $ 2,208,960 Software Support $ 1,721,199 Application Management $ 736,596 Infrastructure Management $ 1,484,757 Development $ 78,817,500 Total $ 87,937,684

108. 108 WAS TCO advantage over Pivotal tc Server • License and support cost (for WAS Express and Base) • Performance • Security • Lower downtime • Monitoring and troubleshooting • Server health monitoring • SLA enforcement at runtime • Dynamic clustering • More complete Java EE compliance Application Server Total Cost of Ownership over 5 years (no JDK)

109. 109 WAS tc Server VMware as % of IBM Hardware w/ support and power $ 532,571 $ 712,822 134% Software w/ support $ 448,383 $ 893,314 199% Application Management $ 200,624 $ 397,751 198% Infrastructure Management $ 442,051 $ 524,402 119% Risk and Downtime $ - $ 340,655 n/a Training $ 93,750 $ 101,175 108% Development $ - $ - 0% Total $ 1,717,379 $ 2,970,120 173% TCO study results: WAS vs tc Server WAS tc Server VMware as % of IBM Hardware w/ support and power $ 532,571 $ 712,822 134% Software w/ support $ 448,383 $ 442,264 99% Application Management $ 200,624 $ 397,751 198% Infrastructure Management $ 442,051 $ 524,402 119% Risk and Downtime $ - $ 340,655 n/a Training $ 93,750 $ 101,175 108% Development $ - $ - 0% Total $ 1,717,379 $ 2,519,070 147% 1. Without JDK support (free OpenJDK) 2. With JDK support (provided by Oracle)

110. 110 Oracle software licensing does not permit soft partitioning Logical/soft partition with WAS ND on 2 cores Logical/soft partition without WAS on 6 cores WebSphere AS ND is licensed for 2 cores License & support cost for 5 years= $53,928 WebLogic Server Enterprise is licensed for 8 cores. License & support cost for 5 years = $210,000 VMware image with WebLogic Server Enterprise on 2 cores VMware images without WebLogic on 6 cores (one still must pay for these) You pay Oracle for all CPUs on a server vs. CPUs that are assigned to the logical VM. Oracle does not allow the use of soft partitioning as a means to determine or limit the number of software licenses required for any given server. Read detailed analysis here: http://bit.ly/1JZFy8V Example: Based on publicly available information as of 7/10/2015 comparing Oracle WebLogic Server Enterprise Edition to IBM WebSphere Application Server Network Deployment. Both include maintenance and support for 5 years. IBM: 70 Processor Value Units per core, Oracle: 0.5 processor multiplier, both are on an x86 server, 2 sockets, quad core each.

111. 111 Virtualization and server partitioning support5 1 - Oracle does not certify nor supports certain 3rd party software hypervisors as shown in the Oracle column (No means no support, Yes means support). 2 - Oracle charges up to full capacity of the servers, regardless of the number of cores used, except for some hypervisors (No means charge for all cores on a server, Yes means charge only for cores assigned to a VM). 3 - Turbocharged cores are not eligible for reduced Oracle pricing on Power7. 4 – Not all configurations of OracleVM and Solaris Containers are eligible for reduced Oracle pricing. 5 - Read more details here: http://whywebsphere.com/2012/02/16/ibm-and-oracle-software-licensing-and-support-in-virtualized-private-cloud-environments/ Support1 Reduced pricing2 IBM Oracle IBM Oracle VMware Yes no Yes no IBM z/VM Yes no Yes no IBM PR/SM Yes no Yes no IBM PowerVM LPAR Yes Yes Yes Yes/no3 Xen Yes no Yes no Red Hat KVM Yes no Yes no Hyper-V Yes Yes Yes no Xen Yes no Yes no Oracle VM Yes Yes Yes Yes/no4 Solaris containers Yes Yes Yes Yes/no4

112. 112 Virtualization cost comparison (license + support over 5 years) Example 1: One x86 server with VMware, 2 sockets, 8 cores total, 2 cores used for the workload IBM #corestobe licensed License cost Support cost over 5 years Total license + support over 5 years Oracle #corestobe licensed License cost Support cost over 5 years Total license + support over 5 years WebSphere Application Server ND 2 $26,600 $21,280 $47,880 WebLogic Server Enterprise Edition 8 $100,000 $110,000 $210,000 IBM DB2 Enterprise Edition 2 $58,380 $46,704 $105,084 Oracle DB Enterprise Edition 8 $190,000 $209,000 $399,000 WebSphere eXtreme Scale 2 $21,280 $17,024 $38,304 Oracle Coherence Grid Edition 8 $100,000 $110,000 $210,000 Example 2: One x86 server with VMware, 2 sockets, 8 cores total, 4 cores used for the workload IBM #corestobe licensed License cost Support cost over 5 years Total license + support over 5 years Oracle #corestobe licensed License cost Support cost over 5 years Total license + support over 5 years WebSphere Application Server ND 4 $53,200 $42,560 $95,760 WebLogic Server Enterprise Edition 8 $100,000 $110,000 $210,000 IBM DB2 Enterprise Edition 4 $116,760 $93,408 $210,168 Oracle DB Enterprise Edition 8 $190,000 $209,000 $399,000 WebSphere eXtreme Scale 4 $42,560 $34,048 $76,608 Oracle Coherence Grid Edition 8 $100,000 $110,000 $210,000 Example 3: One x86 server with VMware, 2 sockets, 8 cores total, 6 cores used for the workload IBM #corestobe licensed License cost Support cost over 5 years Total license + support over 5 years Oracle #corestobe licensed License cost Support cost over 5 years Total license + support over 5 years WebSphere Application Server ND 6 $79,800 $63,840 $143,640 WebLogic Server Enterprise Edition 8 $100,000 $110,000 $210,000 IBM DB2 Enterprise Edition 6 $175,140 $140,112 $315,252 Oracle DB Enterprise Edition 8 $190,000 $209,000 $399,000 WebSphere eXtreme Scale 6 $63,840 $51,072 $114,912 Oracle Coherence Grid Edition 8 $100,000 $110,000 $210,000 List prices are used for cost comparisons. Actual environmental costs and performance characteristics will vary depending on individual client configurations and conditions. Read more details here: http://smarterquestions.org/2012/02/ibm-and-oracle-software-licensing-and-support-in-virtualized-private-cloud-environments

113. 113 Oracle charges more for backup and disaster recovery • Both IBM and Oracle charge for the main cluster and hot backup • Oracle charges full license cost for “Warm” backup servers • IBM does not • Oracle charges full license cost for “Cold” backup servers in DR setup • IBM does not • Oracle charges for “Cold” backup when failover is > 10 days • IBM does not Main cluster Warm backup Cold backup Disaster Recovery $ No Charge $ $ $ $ $ $ Hot backup Example: x86 server, 2 sockets, 8 cores total IBM License + support Oracle License + support Main cluster WAS ND $191,520 WLS EE $210,000 Hot backup WAS ND $191,520 WLS EE $210,000 Warm backup WAS ND $0 WLS EE $210,000 Cold backup* WAS ND $0 WLS EE $210,000 Disaster recovery WAS ND $0 WLS EE $210,000 Total 5 year cost $383,040 $1,050,000 * - failover to cold backup for more than 10 days in a year No Charge No Charge List prices are used for cost comparisons. Actual environmental costs and performance characteristics will vary depending on individual client configurations and conditions.

114. 114 Support costs Support includes version upgrades   Support includes version upgrades First year of support is at no extra charge   First year of support costs additional 22% on top of the license cost Support is 20% of the license cost   Support is 22% of the license cost Support cost is a % of the PPA entitled price   Support cost increases at least 4% per year until reaches list price Critical fixes are provided even without current support   Critical fixes are not provided without current support IBM software running on 3rd party hypervisors is supported   Oracle software running on 3rd party hypervisors is not supported* * - More details on virtualization support: http://smarterquestions.org/2012/02/ibm-and-oracle-software-licensing-and-support-in-virtualized-private-cloud-environments

115. 115 Example: x86 servers, no virtualization, no backup IBM cores License + support Oracle cores License + support WebSphere Application Server ND 12 $287,280 Oracle WebLogic Server Enterprise Edition 12 $315,000 WebSphere Edge Cache (included) 4 $0 Oracle Web Cache (Oracle Web Tier) 4 $21,000 WebSphere Edge WLM (included) 4 $0 3rd party load balancer (hw based) 4 $42,000 DB2 UDB (included) 4 $0 Oracle DB Enterprise (for session replication) 4 $199,500 IBM HTTP Server (included) 8 $0 Oracle HTTP Server (Oracle Web Tier) 8 $42,000 Tivoli Directory (included) 4 $0 Oracle Directory Services 4 $46,200 $287,280 $665,700 WAS ND vs. WLS Enterprise pricing (5 years) IP Sprayers Caching Servers HTTP servers JEE servers LDAP servers Oracle: $cost IBM: $0 Session DB servers IBM: $0 IBM: $0 IBM: $cost IBM: $0 IBM: $0 Oracle: $cost Oracle: $cost Oracle: $cost Oracle: $cost Oracle: $cost List prices are used for cost comparisons. Actual environmental costs and performance characteristics will vary depending on individual client configurations and conditions.

116. 116 IBM #ofcores License + support Oracle Hotcluster Warmbackup DR Coldbackup Virtualization #ofcores License + support WebSphere Application Server ND 16 $383,040 Oracle WebLogic Server Enterprise Edition 16 8 8 8 14 54 $1,417,500 WebSphere Edge Cache (included) 4 $0 Oracle Web Cache (Oracle Web Tier) 4 2 2 2 4 14 $73,500 WebSphere Edge WLM (included) 4 $0 3rd party load balancer (hw based) 4 2 2 8 $84,000 DB2 UDB (included) 4 $0 Oracle DB Enterprise (for session replication) 4 0 2 2 3 11 $548,625 IBM HTTP Server (included) 4 $0 Oracle HTTP Server (Oracle Web Tier) 4 2 2 2 4 14 $73,500 Tivoli Directory (included) 4 $0 Oracle Directory Services 4 2 2 2 4 14 $161,700 $383,040 $2,358,825 Example representing an extreme case of failover and redundancy highlights compounding effect of Oracle terms • Compounding effect of all the license terms and conditions that Oracle imposes on customers results in large software license and support costs1 • Higher license costs2, higher support costs, cost of warm backup, cold backup, DR, no support for virtualization, lower performance per core3 $383K $2.3M 1 - the cost comparison is done over 5 years assuming x86 servers with 70 PVU core rating for IBM and 0.5 core factor for Oracle 2 - List prices are used for cost comparisons. Actual environmental costs and performance characteristics will vary depending on individual client configurations and conditions. 3 - performance metrics derived from SPECjEnterprise2010 – see following charts for details Example of license + support costs over 5 years:

117. 117 Oracle WebLogic Server costs higher than WebSphere IBM WAS ND Oracle WLS EE Runtime performance Best in the industry 5-50% slower than WAS Flexible mgmt for large deployments Robust framework No -> Extra admin cost Manage mixed versions in a single cell Robust admin tooling No -> Extra admin cost Manage DataPower & HTTPD in admin GUI Productive admin tooling No -> Extra admin cost SOAP & page fragment cache w/ replication Faster performance No -> Extra admin cost Eclipse toolkit for the Jython admin scripts Productive admin tooling No -> Extra admin cost Private cloud capabilities Yes via HVE and IWD Limited -> Extra admin cost SLA, Health and dynamic clustering Included (formerly WVE) No Production HTTP server included Included No -> Purchase Oracle Web Tier DB for session persistence included Included No -> Purchase Oracle DBMS Production LDAP included Included No -> Purchase Oracle Directory Edge components included Included No -> Purchase Oracle Web Tier Portlet API (JSR 286), WSRP 2.0 Included for free in WAS No -> Purchase Oracle WebCenter Native z/OS, Linux on Power Supported No -> Not supported Communication enabled applications Supported No -> Build your own Software hypervisor sub-capacity pricing Pay for CPUs used Pay for all CPUs in a server Warm backup, cold backup (>10 days) Free Purchase full license Cold disaster recovery site Free Purchase full license Support cost 1st year is free, 20% thereafter 22% per year, first year is not free

118. 118 Oracle’s practices are not getting good reviews from clients Source; ITIC Reliability Survey, February 2011: http://itic-corp.com/blog/2011/02/itic-reliabiity-survey-oracle-users-anxiousangry-over-service-support-slippage Product Performance, Service, Support (Responded Excellent or Very Good) 78% give high marks to IBM 80 60 40 20 0 Percentage 20% dissatisfied with Oracle 20 15 10 5 0 Product Performance, Service, Support (Responded Dissatisfied) Percentage Last year, over 400 Oracle WebLogic clients, chose IBM WebSphere

119. 119

WAS vs JBoss, WebLogic, Tomcat (year 2015)

You are reading a preview.

Check these out next

WAS vs JBoss, WebLogic, Tomcat (year 2015)

More Related Content

Slideshows for you (20)

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to WAS vs JBoss, WebLogic, Tomcat (year 2015) (20)

Recently uploaded (20)