Re: Benchmarking kqueue() performance?
From: Terry Lambert (tlambert2_at_mindspring.com)
Date: 10/18/03
- Previous message: Christopher Arnold: "Re: primary slave HDD hangs"
- In reply to: Lev Walkin: "Re: Benchmarking kqueue() performance?"
- Next in thread: Yaoping Ruan: "Re: Benchmarking kqueue() performance?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 22:03:42 -0700 To: Lev Walkin <vlm@netli.com>
Lev Walkin wrote:
> One of the most comprehensive sites about that problem is:
>
> http://www.kegel.com/c10k.html
That's about scaling to a large number of connections, not about
kqueue() vs. select performance.
The biggest problem with a large number of connections, at least
as far as FreeBSD is concerned, is the TCP timer implementation
using a callout wheel, since any expiring timer has to traverse
every bucket in the chain, instead of stopping at the first one
that's un expired (see the BSD 4.2/4.3 timers for an example of
the right way to do it).
FWIW: I've had a FreeBSD box with a static page server on it up
to 1.6M simultaneous connections with very little work, so 10K
is pretty trivial in comparison.
For doing real work, and giving 1G to a server process and 512M
to caching, this number drops to ~250K connections, but that's
still 25 time what he claims is some insurmountable barrier.
BTW, the company for which I did this work is still shipping
real product that handles those loads on a FreeBSD box, FWIW.
-- Terry
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: Christopher Arnold: "Re: primary slave HDD hangs"
- In reply to: Lev Walkin: "Re: Benchmarking kqueue() performance?"
- Next in thread: Yaoping Ruan: "Re: Benchmarking kqueue() performance?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|