apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Scott Lamb <sl...@slamb.org>
Subject apr_socket_timeout speed (was Re: Compile-time vs. run-time checks)
Date Tue, 24 Feb 2004 07:33:31 GMT
On Feb 23, 2004, at 11:11 PM, Cliff Woolley wrote:

> On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Scott Lamb wrote:
>> significant difference between them. In transferring either big or
>> small files with httpd-2.0 HEAD and ab over loopback on Darwin
>> (keepalive on). Which I'd think would be the ideal situation for 
>> seeing
>> an improvement...
> Neither ab nor loopback make for a particularly good test of this sort 
> of
> thing.  I suggest you use flood instead of ab and use two machines 
> instead
> of the loopback adapter.

I'll play with it a while. Flood was giving me trouble (couldn't find 
docs on what the numbers it spat out meant, and the analysis awk script 
got divide-by-zero errors), so I tried siege for a bit. Had 
disappointing results, then realized I wasn't anywhere close to 
saturating the server's CPU or the network. The roughly equal-speed 
Linux 2.6 client machine is groaning...and it's spending 60% time in 
softirq, according to top. I recently replaced the network card with 
some cheap thing; maybe the drivers are just that awful. If so, I'll 
need to replace it before getting decent benchmarks; it might be a 

> --Cliff

Thanks for the ideas.


View raw message