hc-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Becke <be...@u.washington.edu>
Subject Re: Performance Issue
Date Tue, 29 Jul 2003 14:30:34 GMT
Kalnichevski, Oleg wrote:
> All credits should go to Todd. He's done pretty much all the hard
> work.

Agreed.  Thank you Todd for bringing this up and for the test code.

>> Maybe it is just me, but I can live with a 1ms penalty that
>> dramatically increases the reliability of the re-used connections.
>> Based on your research, I think we should keep the isStale() check.
>> What do others think?
> 
> 
> I agree. I think this performance penalty is well justified. I would
> still like to have an option of disabling the check (especially for
> the single-threaded connection manager), though, as the 'stale'
> connection check also has some nasty side-effects on SSL connections
> when running on older JDKs.

I have done some more tests this morning as well and I agree with your 
findings.  2.0 with or without isStale is definitely better than alpha-3 
(at least in this case).  Especially when using Expect: 100-continue.  I 
believe this functionality was broken in Alpha-3.  I also performed 
tests between RC1 reusing connections with isStale and RC1 without 
reusing connections (I forced a close each time).  The good news here is 
that reusing connections (even with isStale) is still better than 
creating a new connection each time.

I agree that the small penalty for isStale is worth the added benefit. 
Most likely there will be some variance depending on platform and JRE 
but I still think it's worthwhile.

As far as disabling isStale(), where do we want to add the preference 
for this?  Is it per HttpConnectionManager or HttpClient?

Mike


Mime
View raw message