Set Language and Currency
Select your preferred language and currency. You can update the settings at any time.



User & Pass Auth


< Back to Blog
Performance comparison analysis of dynamic proxy servers and static proxy servers
by Jony

In modern network environments, proxy servers play an important role in data exchange and security assurance. Proxy servers can be roughly divided into two categories: dynamic proxy and static proxy, each of which has unique characteristics and applicable scenarios. This article will focus on the performance comparison of these two proxy servers to help readers make rational choices in practical applications.

Overview of dynamic proxy servers

A dynamic proxy server is a server that can generate proxy objects at runtime. It usually creates proxy objects based on interfaces, realizing the ability to enhance the functions of target objects without modifying the source code. Dynamic proxy has significant advantages in dealing with complex network environments and scenarios that require flexible configuration.

The working principle of dynamic proxy server is to dynamically generate proxy classes at runtime, and dynamically select objects and methods to be proxied according to needs. This flexibility makes dynamic proxy outstanding in implementing AOP (aspect-oriented programming) and other aspects, and also provides convenience for system expansion and maintenance.

Overview of static proxy server

Compared with dynamic proxy, static proxy server has determined the proxy object at compile time and cannot be changed dynamically. Static proxy implements the needs of functional enhancement or access control by manually writing proxy classes. Although static proxy is slightly less flexible and scalable than dynamic proxy, in some scenarios with high performance requirements, static proxy may perform better due to its characteristics of directly calling the target object method.

The working principle of static proxy server is determined at compile time by proxy class, so its performance is usually higher than dynamic proxy, which is suitable for scenarios with strict requirements on response speed, such as financial trading systems.

Performance comparison analysis

In order to deeply compare the performance characteristics of dynamic proxy and static proxy servers, we conducted a series of experiments and performance tests. The following are our analysis results:

1. Performance consumption: In terms of performance consumption, static proxy is usually more efficient than dynamic proxy. Because dynamic proxy requires additional class loading, method calling and other overheads at runtime, while static proxy directly calls the target object's method, reducing these intermediate links.

2. Flexibility and scalability: Dynamic proxy is significantly better than static proxy in flexibility and scalability. Dynamic proxy can dynamically generate proxy objects as needed, while static proxy needs to manually write proxy classes every time, and its scalability is not as good as dynamic proxy.

3. Security: Since dynamic proxy can generate proxy objects at runtime, it can improve the security of the system to a certain extent, and can achieve more fine-grained permission control and security policies.

4. Applicable scenarios: In systems with frequent demand changes and more functional expansions, it is recommended to choose dynamic proxy; in systems with extremely high performance requirements and strong stability requirements, static proxy may be more suitable.

Actual case analysis

In order to further verify our analysis, we selected several actual application scenarios for case analysis:

- E-commerce platform order system: In the order system of the e-commerce platform, dynamic proxy can dynamically generate proxy objects according to the permissions of different users to achieve permission control and security policies; while static proxy can improve the efficiency and stability of order processing by pre-writing proxy classes.

- Online payment system: In online payment systems, static proxies can better ensure the real-time and stability of payment transactions due to their high performance, while dynamic proxies can dynamically generate proxy objects based on the user's payment permissions to achieve more flexible permission control.

In summary, dynamic proxy servers and static proxy servers each have their own unique advantages and applicable scenarios. When choosing the type of proxy server, it is necessary to make comprehensive considerations based on the needs and characteristics of the specific application. If the system has high performance requirements and stability is the primary consideration, static proxies may be more suitable; if the system requires flexibility and scalability, and can dynamically adjust proxy objects according to demand, dynamic proxies are a better choice.

Through the detailed analysis and actual cases in this article, readers can more clearly understand the performance differences and applicable scenarios between dynamic proxies and static proxies, which will help make wise technical choices and optimization decisions in actual applications.

Contact us with email

[email protected]

Customer Service
Hi there!
We're here to answer your questiona about LunaProxy.

How to use proxy?


Which countries have static proxies?


How to use proxies in third-party tools?


How long does it take to receive the proxy balance or get my new account activated after the payment?


Do you offer payment refunds?

Help Center