Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 93124 invoked from network); 28 Sep 2006 21:11:07 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 28 Sep 2006 21:11:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 41847 invoked by uid 500); 28 Sep 2006 21:11:02 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 41785 invoked by uid 500); 28 Sep 2006 21:11:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 41773 invoked by uid 99); 28 Sep 2006 21:11:02 -0000 Received: from idunn.apache.osuosl.org (HELO idunn.apache.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.84) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 28 Sep 2006 14:11:02 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.5 required=5.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE,HTML_MESSAGE Received: from [12.11.148.122] ([12.11.148.122:14898] helo=relay2.ptc.com) by idunn.apache.osuosl.org (ecelerity 2.1.1.8 r(12930)) with ESMTP id A4/21-00212-56A3C154 for ; Thu, 28 Sep 2006 14:11:01 -0700 Received: from hq-ex3fe3.ptcnet.ptc.com ([132.253.201.67]) by relay2.ptc.com with ESMTP; 28 Sep 2006 17:10:59 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: i="4.09,231,1157342400"; d="scan'208,217"; a="161351481:sNHT26384608" Received: from [132.253.11.132] ([132.253.11.132]) by hq-ex3fe3.ptcnet.ptc.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 28 Sep 2006 17:10:58 -0400 Message-ID: <451C3A61.6080903@ptc.com> Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 16:10:57 -0500 From: Jess Holle User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Windows/20060909) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jess Holle CC: dev@httpd.apache.org, users@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: Apache 2.x perf degradation on large downloads on Windows References: <451C39CD.6060106@ptc.com> In-Reply-To: <451C39CD.6060106@ptc.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------000606090200060804040005" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Sep 2006 21:10:58.0589 (UTC) FILETIME=[981AFCD0:01C6E342] X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------000606090200060804040005 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jess Holle wrote: > I'm seeing what appears to be really severe performance degradation > during the course of really large downloads (e.g. 800MBs) on Windows > Apache's -- both 2.0.x (recent builds) and 2.2.3. > > Has anyone else seen this? Is this just a lack of tuning? If so, > pointers would be appreciated. > > Note we're using: > > SendBufferSize 16384 > > and > > EnableSendfile Off > > Before blaming the latter setting, however, I should point out that > the problem we're seeing exists both for this case with simple static > file downloads and for dynamic downloads through mod_jk and Tomcat > (we've only tested this case with 2.0.x). The latter case is actually > our real issue, but unless/until static file downloads don't show this > degradation there seems to be little point in chasing the (more > complex) dynamic case. Also the enabling send file does not seem to make any difference to the results. -- Jess Holle --------------000606090200060804040005 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jess Holle wrote:

I'm seeing what appears to be really severe performance degradation during the course of really large downloads (e.g. 800MBs) on Windows Apache's -- both 2.0.x (recent builds) and 2.2.3.

Has anyone else seen this? Is this just a lack of tuning? If so, pointers would be appreciated.

Note we're using:

SendBufferSize 16384

and

EnableSendfile Off

Before blaming the latter setting, however, I should point out that the problem we're seeing exists both for this case with simple static file downloads and for dynamic downloads through mod_jk and Tomcat (we've only tested this case with 2.0.x). The latter case is actually our real issue, but unless/until static file downloads don't show this degradation there seems to be little point in chasing the (more complex) dynamic case.

Also the enabling send file does not seem to make any difference to the results.

--
Jess Holle

--------------000606090200060804040005--