performance comparision spring quarkus

Table of Contents

• Performance comparison between Spring and Quarkus

Performance comparison between Spring and Quarkus

Quarkus offers a big advantage in resource consumption compared to a Spring application. Especially in native mode, the memory footprint of a Quarkus application is extremely low, which can be a deciding factor in real-world environments. The tables performace comparision application 1 and performace comparision application 2, which show the startup and memory consumption of two applications that are similar in their Quarkus and Spring implementations, illustrate this point. Application 1 is more complex in scope than Application 2 and uses more dependencies. The listings above the tables show the functions/extensions of the applications and the lines of code (only java files).

Application 1:

• LOC (without automatically generated classes)

  • Quarkus: ~4600

  • Spring: ~7700 (separated into api and core module, as described for the classic project structure; api: ~3800, core: 3900)

• Features

  • 3 entitites

  • REST service

  • Connection to a Postgres database (using Spring Data JPA and QueryDSL for the repository implementation)

  • Flyway for database migration

  • Kafka for asynchronous messaging

  • Avro for data serialization combined with a schema registry

Table 1. performace comparision application 1

	Spring	Quarkus JVM Mode	Quarkus Native Mode
startup time (time until first response)	~35 seconds (+/- 1s)	~5 seconds	~0,9 seconds
memory usage	~850 - 900 MB	~550 MB	~190 MB

---

Application 2:

• LOC

  • Quarkus: ~300

  • Spring: ~ 280

• Features

  • 1 entity

  • REST service with Postgres database connection

Table 2. performace comparision application 2

	Spring	Quarkus JVM Mode	Quarkus Native Mode
startup time (time until first response)	~9 seconds	~3,9 seconds	~0,9 seconds
memory usage	~810 MB	~460 MB	~90 MB