Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Article . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: ZENODO
ZENODO
Article . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Article . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Comparative Analysis Of Traditional And Docker-Based Deployment For Web Applications

Authors: Aryan Gupta;

Comparative Analysis Of Traditional And Docker-Based Deployment For Web Applications

Abstract

Docker containerization has been extensively studied over the past decade, and a general consensus has formed around its performance characteristics. Studies running on native Linux platforms — Felter et al. [1], Potdar et al. [4], Mavridis and Karatza [5] — consistently report less than 5 to 6 percent execution overhead and 20 to 30 percent memory efficiency gains. More recently, a small number of studies have begun examining Docker on non-Linux platforms. Sladovic et al. [9] tested Docker across Windows, macOS, and Ubuntu in 2024 using compilation benchmarks and found Windows with WSL2 retained about 94 percent of native Linux performance. Sergeev et al. [11] compared Docker on Windows and Linux in 2022 and found only marginal arithmetic and memory performance differences between the two platforms. However, these cross-platform studies share a limitation: they used general-purpose or compilation benchmarks rather than high-concurrency web application workloads. The performance of Docker on Windows WSL2 under concurrent HTTP request loads — the scenario most relevant to web application developers — has not been systematically measured. This paper fills that gap by running four controlled experiments on a Windows 11 machine with an Intel i5-12500H Alder Lake processor under sustained concurrent workloads: application startup time, concurrency scaling from 10 to 200 users, memory consumption across workload sizes, and sustained execution under peak load. Our results reveal a more significant performance gap than prior cross-platform studies found. Under high-concurrency compute-intensive web workloads, Docker-on-WSL2 showed 58.1% execution overhead — far higher than Sladovic et al.\\\'s 6% and Sergeev et al.\\\'s marginal difference. We attribute this to the WSL2 virtual Ethernet bridge, which adds consistent per-request overhead under concurrent load that compilation benchmarks do not exercise. Memory efficiency of 25.3% reduction was confirmed consistent with prior literature. Additionally, Docker achieved near-complete CPU saturation of all 16 Alder Lake threads through the Linux CFS scheduler — a workload-dependent advantage that prior cross-platform studies did not document.

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Green