[en] Docker and WebAssembly (Wasm) are playing increasingly important roles in
modern software development, each offering unique benefits in portability, per formance, and deployment efficiency. As Wasm evolves beyond the browser into
cloud-native and edge computing environments, its integration with container
runtimes prompts a closer examination of performance trade-offs compared to
traditional multi-platform containers.
In contrast to conventional Docker containers, Wasm binaries offer a portable,
compact, and secure deployment format. In this paper, we extend our
prior investigation by introducing two new benchmark suites: benchx and
sqlite-multiarch to explore deeper performance characteristics across Wasm
and native multi-architecture containers using containerd, focusing on four plat forms: AMD64, ARM64 (Nvidia’s Jetson Nano and Orin), and RISCV64 (StarFive
VisionFive2). We analyze pull time, startup latency, and image size across both
native and Wasm runtimes.
Our results show that Wasm containers reduce image size by up to 70% and
achieve up to 25% faster cold pull times compared to native containers. With the
sqlite-multiarch benchmark, we observe Wasm startup overheads compared
to native execution, which highlights both performance gaps and opportunities
for runtime optimizations. Across all platforms, Wasm containers executed via
containerd consistently outperformed Docker-based setups.
We demonstrate that Wasm runtimes can effectively support realistic data intensive workloads such as full-text search, JSON parsing, and R-tree spatial
queries, while offering improved deployment efficiency and better performance
isolation. These findings reaffirm Wasm’s potential as a complementary compute
layer for heterogeneous, multi-architecture cloud-edge deployments.
This research has been partly funded by the Luxembourg National Research Fund (FNR) under contract number 16327771 and has been supported by Proximus Luxem bourg SA. For the purpose of open access, and in fulfillment of the obligations arising from the grant agreement, the author has applied a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission
Kakati S, Brorsson M. Performance and usability implications of multiplatform and webassembly containers. In: International conference on cloud computing and services science 2025. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:277619055.
Pham S, Oliveira K, Lung C-H. WebAssembly modules as alternative to docker containers in IoT application development. In: 2023 IEEE 3rd international conference on electronic communications, Internet of Things and Big Data (ICEIB). IEEE; 2023. p. 519–524.
Gackstatter P, Frangoudis PA, Dustdar S. Pushing serverless to the edge with webassembly runtimes. In: 2022 22nd IEEE international symposium on cluster, cloud and internet computing (CCGrid). IEEE; 2022. p. 140–149.
Gkonis P Giannopoulos A Trakadas P Masip-Bruin X D’Andria F A survey on IoT-edge-cloud continuum systems: status, challenges, use cases, and open issues Future Internet 2023 15 12 383 10.3390/fi15120383
Kjorveziroski V, Filiposka S, Mishev A. Evaluating WebAssembly for orchestrated deployment of serverless functions. In: 2022 30th telecommunications forum (TELFOR). IEEE; 2022. p. 1–4.
Li Z, Zeng D, Chen R. WebAssembly or container? Joint optimization of microservice consolidation and deployment towards cost efficient edge-end consortium. In: 2024 IEEE/ACM 32nd international symposium on Quality of Service (IWQoS). IEEE; 2024. p. 1–10.
Ferrari D Sciascio E Gioiosa R Krieger O Krikellas K Giuliani G Webassembly for cloud-native applications: a performance evaluation Future Gener Comput Syst 2021 115 335 348
Fiedler M, Alrowaily H, Menzel K, Stiller B. Performance evaluation of WebAssembly as a cloud-edge continuum technology. In: 2020 IEEE 6th international conference on network softwarization (NetSoft). IEEE; 2020. p. 334–340.
Felter W, Ferreira A, Rajamony R, Rubio J. An updated performance comparison of virtual machines and Linux containers. In: 2015 IEEE international symposium on performance analysis of systems and software (ISPASS). IEEE; 2015. p. 171–172.
Zhao W, Zeng R, Zhou Y. Wapplique: testing WebAssembly runtime via execution context-aware bytecode mutation. In: Proceedings of the 33rd ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on software testing and analysis. 2024. p. 1035–1047.
She X, Zhao Y, Wang H. Wadec: decompiling WebAssembly using large language model. In: Proceedings of the 39th IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering. 2024. p. 481–492.
Youn D Shin W Lee J Ryu S Breitner J Gardner P Lindley S Pretnar M Rao X Watt C et al. Bringing the WebAssembly standard up to speed with SpecTec Proc ACM Program Lang 2024 8 PLDI 1559 1584 10.1145/3656440
Waseem M, Das T, Ahmad A, Liang P, Mikkonen T. Issues and their causes in WebAssembly applications: an empirical study. In: Proceedings of the 28th international conference on evaluation and assessment in software engineering. 2024. p. 170–180.
Kakati S, Brorsson M. An investigative study of WebAssembly performance in cloud-to-edge. In: 2024 International symposium on parallel computing and distributed systems (PCDS). 2024. p. 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/PCDS61776.2024.10743586.
Spies B, Mock M. An evaluation of WebAssembly in non-web environments. In: 2021 XLVII Latin American computing conference (CLEI). IEEE; 2021. p. 1–10.
Wang Z, Wang J, Wang Z, Hu Y. Characterization and implication of edge WebAssembly runtimes. In: 2021 IEEE 23rd Int Conf on high performance computing & communications; 7th int conf on data science & systems; 19th int conf on smart city; 7th int conf on dependability in sensor, Cloud & Big Data Systems & Application (HPCC/DSS/SmartCity/DependSys). IEEE. 2021. p. 71–80.
Mendki P. Evaluating WebAssembly enabled serverless approach for edge computing. In: 2020 IEEE Cloud Summit. 2020. p. 161–166. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEECloudSummit48914.2020.00031.
Hockley D, Williamson C. Benchmarking runtime scripting performance in WebAssembly 2022.
Wang W. How far we’ve come—a characterization study of standalone WebAssembly runtimes. In: 2022 IEEE international symposium on workload characterization (IISWC). IEEE; 2022. p. 228–241.
Kakati S, Brorsson M. A cross-architecture evaluation of WebAssembly in the cloud-edge continuum. In: 2024 IEEE 24th international symposium on cluster, cloud and internet computing (CCGrid). 2024. p. 337–346.
Chadha M, Krueger N, John J, Jindal A, Gerndt M, Benedict S. Exploring the use of WebAssembly in HPC. In: Proceedings of the 28th ACM SIGPLAN annual symposium on principles and practice of parallel programming. 2023. p. 92–106.
Fink M, Stavrakakis D, Sprokholt D, Chakraborty S, Ekberg J-E, Bhatotia P. Cage: hardware-accelerated safe WebAssembly. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM/IEEE international symposium on code generation and optimization. 2025. p. 538–552.
Bosshard B. On the use of WebAssembly in a serverless context. In: Agile processes in software engineering and extreme programming—workshops. 2020. p. 141.
Liu M Shen H Zhang Y Mei H Ma Y WebAssembly for container runtime: Are we there yet? ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol 2025 34 6 1 22 10.1145/3712197
Mattia GP, Beraldi R. Leveraging reinforcement learning for online scheduling of real-time tasks in the edge/fog-to-cloud computing continuum. In: 2021 IEEE 20th international symposium on network computing and applications (NCA). 2021. p. 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1109/NCA53618.2021.9685413.
Nastic S, Pusztai T, Morichetta A, Pujol VC, Dustdar S, Vii D, Xiong Y. Polaris scheduler: edge sensitive and SLO aware workload scheduling in cloud-edge-IoT clusters. In: 2021 IEEE 14th international conference on cloud computing (CLOUD). 2021. p. 206–216. https://doi.org/10.1109/CLOUD53861.2021.00034.
Orive A Agirre A Truong H-L Sarachaga I Marcos M Quality of Service aware orchestration for cloud-edge continuum applications Sensors 2022 22 5 1755 10.3390/s22051755