Tervela Message Medium Blog

My radar goes off when legacy vendors with legacy products announce non-legacy performance numbers. “Wow,” I say, “I’m very interested in hearing more about the innovation.” Often, however, the innovation is in the testing and not in the architecture.  Recently, one of the “big boys” called out Tervela when they touted the performance numbers of their new-and-improved-legacy-messaging.

I decided to check out their testing methodology. I couldn’t help but scratch my head on the lab and testing.

Years ago I had some excellent labs that would benchmark and test infrastructure performance and reliability: WANs, LANs, apps, etc. The challenge my group had was not in setting up in infrastructure, but rather in establishing flows that would test real world scenarios, edge cases, etc.  This was hard and – at times - non-scientific. The interdependencies and varying load conditions made it nearly impossible to model. That didn’t stop us and we called it dirty water testing. Clean water testing was just the opposite: simple, deterministic, and unrealistic.  We did both, but the dirty water mimicked real-world. We had no surprises when we went into production.

I want to applaud the big boys for calling us out after their clean water test. As a courtesy, please check out our testing methodology and the results for messaging infrastructure testing. It’s dirty water and it’s why a Tervela messaging infrastructure works as advertised. We’ll discuss their approach later. (And their less-than-green footprint, too.)

If you can't see the whole messaging infrastructure testing article, email me and I'll send you a copy.

Regards,
=rob.ciampa

Tags: tervela (2) messaging infrastructure testing (1) 

Comments (0)