httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cliff Woolley <cliffwool...@yahoo.com>
Subject RE: mod_file_cache performance
Date Mon, 02 Jul 2001 19:20:27 GMT
On Mon, 2 Jul 2001, Gonyou, Austin wrote:

> >
> >           No keepalives                 Keepalives
> >           --------------------------    ----------------------------
> > no cache  118.98 req/s  676.92 KB/s     2280.06 req/s  13053.79 KB/s
> > CacheFile  90.19 req/s  511.21 KB/s     2181.21 req/s  12440.95 KB/s
> > MMapFile   80.90 req/s  458.54 KB/s     1978.32 req/s  11283.72 KB/s
>
> Seen here, this is a common theme when benchmarking. The less the connection
> numbers are, there is a direct proportion to the kb/second that will be seen
> as through put. This is a good thing, because if it went up as you scaled
> down, you'd have the inverse affect. This is not preferred of course.

I think one of us has missed the other's point (it's entirely possible
that I've missed yours).  I think what you're saying is that it makes
sense for the KB/s to decrease when the req/s decreases, as opposed to the
inverse effect.  Yes, I agree, that makes sense.  That's not what I'm
worried about.  The problem I'm seeing is that ALL of the numbers across
the row should be HIGHER for the CacheFile case than for the "no cache"
case.  That they're not means there's something wrong with the caching
system.  =-)

--Cliff


--------------------------------------------------------------
   Cliff Woolley
   cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
   Charlottesville, VA



Mime
View raw message