Load images via http or using bytearray? which the best way?
It was long time since I wanted to perform this kind of test, but for different reasons I never had the time to do that.
Some days ago fnally I’ve found the time thanks to a project I’m involved into.
A local webserver running flash remoting via pyamf and a flash standalone application which need to load tons of images locally.
I’ve noticed that sending from amf the list of images path to be loaded required too much time (for me), even if they’re loaded locally.
Because of this I decided to try a first benchmark loading a single image using the standard way: send the link from amf and then load it using the classic actionscript Loader.
The second test was to send directly from amf the image stream using a ByteArray and then loading the image in flash using the Loader.loadBytes method.
In this way I’ve noticed that the second task requires less time than the first one (more or less 40% less).
Unfortunately our application needs to load something like 50/100 images at the same time.
For this reason I did a new test loading 22 images of 500Kb each (10Mb total). For a better result I decided to use both pyamf and blazeds, to be sure there’s no problems in the language used. Moreover I used charles to register the benchmark of these tasks.
The results were unexpected!
First test: passing form amf the list of url images and loading using the standard flash Loader to load all of them simultaneously.
The time elapsed from the flash method call to the results was about 40 milliseconds. Then from the remote method result to the completion of all Loader about 1400 milliseconds.
Second test: passing from amf an arraycollection of bytearrays containing all the images stream to be loaded directly in flash.
The time elapsed form the flash method call to its result: about 2900 milliseconds. Time elapsed from the result to the all Loaders completion: about 900 milliseconds.
This results were unexpected for me, expecially because both with blazeds and pyamf sending 10Mb of bytearrays tooks something like 3 seconds!
At a first impression I thought the problem was the time for java and python to create the amf stream data, but after a deeper test I discovered that they took more or less 30ms to generate the amf stream and the real bottleneck was the http transfer of this stream data.
I’m attaching here the screenshots of the charles sessions using blazeds:
Here you can find also the complete benchmark result using flash trace within the swf:
TEST1 TOTAL TIME: 1493
TEST2 TOTAL TIME: 3840
TEST1 TOTAL TIME: 1049
TEST2 TOTAL TIME: 4763
Here you can see the source code used for these tests:
In conclusion. While sending 10Mb of data ( for example bytearray ) requires more or less 2.5 seconds using flash remoting as single requests ( because the transfer rate of the webserver it’s about 4Mb/sec ), loading simultaneusly 20 images from the webserver, using http, tooks 1 second.
This is because the webserver for each requests opens a different thread to dispatch the request and in this way the total time to perform this task is less than the first method.
Today I’ve started a new Flash project which will also involve Flash Remoting.
So I decided to try this ServiceCapture tools for debugging the amf messages as replacement of the builtin NetConnection debugger.
I’m really suck of the flash NetConnection Debugger (it works 50% of the times for me). Sometimes I need to close and re-open it in order to make it works again, sometimes it doesnt display anything at all…
Btw, ServiceCapture can capture every kind of HTTP traffic, not only remoting calls and it has also a bandwidth simulation feature. (and these are cool features)
However the full license costs $34.99, which is not so cheap for this kind of tool. http://kevinlangdon.com/serviceCapture/
Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.