PASOE slower than direct Classic AppServer calls

PASOE is slower than direct Classic AppServer calls.
PASOE performance is lower than Classic AppServer performance.
Classic AppServer calls are faster than with PAOSE.
Classic AppServer calls perform better than PAOSE calls.

Case1: An ABL client which connects to Classic AppServer (without AIA which means it is not HTTP)

Case2: An ABL client which connects to PASOE server(which is APSV and HTTP connection)

Case3: An ABL client which connects to Classic AppServer via AIA-(AppServer Internet Adapter which is http connection)

This is expected behavior. 

Comparisons between all the three cases:

Case1	Case2	Case3
Faster in executing the requests	Slower compared to Case1	Slower compared to both Case1 &2
Supports only ABL client	Supports any client exposed as HTTP	Supports any client exposed as HTTP
Need to depend on NS for loadbalancing	Loadbalancing comes internally	Need to depend on NS for loadbalancing
No built-in security	Built-n security using Spring	Should depend on Tomcat Security
Need multiple brokers to handle the load from multiple applications	Multi-session agent will be able to handle multiple multi-level applications	Need multiple brokers to handle the load from multiple applications
Must have an AdminServer	Not required	Must have an AdminServer
AdminServer starts the NameServer and AppServer, then the AdminServer is just used to monitor and manage	Not required	AdminServer starts the NameServer and AppServer, then the AdminServer is just used to monitor and manage
Client connects to NameServer (optional) and is then redirected to the AppServer	Not required	Client connects to NameServer (optional) and is then redirected to the AppServer
Cannot support HTTP/HTTPS	In-built capability	If the Client needs to connect through the internet (HTTP/HTTPS) you must install and configure separate and distinct adapters AIA/WSA/REST/Mobile

It was determined that the Progress Product is functioning as designed.

When comparing PAS for OE with direct Classic AppServer these are not similar architecture, PAOSE should really be compared with Classic AppServer using AIA (AppServer Internet Adapter) .

ABL client connecting directly to Classic AppServer (without AIA which means it is not HTTP) with ABL client connecting to PASOE server (which is APSV and HTTP connection) are NOT comparable architectures.
Case1 and Case2 should not be compared.

APSV of PASOE with AIA of Classic AppServer are comparable architectures.
Case2 and Case3 should be considered for comparison regarding performance.

PAOSE has benefits such as, security features and fault-tolerance which will add some processing overhead.
PAS for OE always uses HTTPS to tunnel APSV requests where AIA uses direct sockets.


An enhancement to the product can be requested through the Progress Community via an Ideas submission. Customer feedback is valuable and Idea submissions are monitored by our Product Management team. Enhancement requests are reviewed during the planning phase of each new product release and a list of the enhancements chosen for implementation can be found in the Release Notes documents that accompany each release. Once an Idea is submitted the Progress Software Community will have the opportunity to comment on and vote for the Idea.

For detailed information on how to submit an Idea, please refer to Knowledge Base article  How to submit an enhancement request for a Progress product? .

Progress Article(s):
Guidelines and best practices for High Availability and Fault Tolerance for an OpenEdge Application.
Configuring PASOE for client server for stability.
Contacting Progress Professional Services (PSO) Team
How to submit an enhancement request for a Progress product?
PASOE - Example of PASOE Machine sizes for ATM Benchmark on Amazon AWS