Date: Thu, 4 May 1995 20:33:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: Simon Spero <ses@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
To: Brian Behlendorf <brian@organic.com>
Cc: new-httpd@hyperreal.com
Subject: Re: HTTP/1.1 implementation speeds (was Re: votes for 0.6.3)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9505041819.E16415-0100000@eat.organic.com>
Message-Id: <Pine.SOL.3.91.950504200929.6527K-100000@chivalry>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-new-httpd@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org

On Thu, 4 May 1995, Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> 
> Word on the street is that someone is working on a java-based HTTP server 
> which is already 10 times faster than netsite... shshshsh :)

That sounds more or less right, though I'd like to know whether the code 
is running on 2.4 or 2.5. The numbers are pretty similar to the old MDMA, 
which was spending virtually none of its time in user-based code. 


Java bleeds a bit of cpu performance, but for "gissa file" requests, all
the cpu is going on TCP in the kernel (there's a fair bit of lossage in
2.4 that is reportedly fixed in 2.5; hopefully I'll get to try 2.5 out RSN
on some meaty hardware and see how well it flies). 

bash# /etc/mount /dev/peeve /hobby-horse
bash#
It's very easy to get bogus numbers on benchmarks, because there's no 
agreed on standard. The CommerceNet WebStones RFP should be out soon, and 
that looks like it should end up with something pretty sane- however 
doing benchmarks right gets pretty hard. A lot depends on the speed of 
the client's network connection; loads that are fine if everyone is on a 
T1 can knock a server completely out of shape if you change to V32bis 
modems. It's kind of hard to distill this sort of performance curve into 
a single '10x' ratio. 

bash# /etc/umount /hobby-horse
bash#


Simon