Thank you for your reply. At what point should I set this socket option? I am assuming right after the socket is allocated??
I will try this and post my results tomorrow night. For those wondering, I cannot just execute Sendmail directly, there are many architectural reasons for this design... Thanks again, Wayne On Tue, 24 Aug 1999, Daniel O'Connor wrote: > Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 13:41:37 +0930 (CST) > From: Daniel O'Connor <docon...@gsoft.com.au> > To: Wayne Cuddy <wa...@crb-web.com> > Cc: FreeBSD Hackers List <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG> > Subject: RE: network performance vs. linux on small transfers > > > On 24-Aug-99 Wayne Cuddy wrote: > > I REALLY want to use FreeBSD over Linux on this one and need some major help > > to get the performance out of FreeBSD. > > Tried setsockopt and TCP_NODELAY? > > >From netinet/tcp.h > #define TCP_NODELAY 0x01 /* don't delay send to coalesce packets */ > > --- > Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer > for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au > "The nice thing about standards is that there > are so many of them to choose from." > -- Andrew Tanenbaum > On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, David Greenman wrote: > Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 21:17:06 -0700 > From: David Greenman <d...@root.com> > To: wa...@crb-web.com > Cc: FreeBSD Hackers List <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG> > Subject: Re: network performance vs. linux on small transfers > > >I am involved in a messaging system at work in which we need to send/receive > >large amounts of small (one line messages) SMTP messages. We are currently > >using Sendmail 8.9.3 > >on HPUX. > > > >Our application sends messages down a FIFO to a daemon process that is > >reading from > >the FIFO. This process then connects to port 25 of the destination system > >and > >delivers the mail via SMTP. Currently the destination system is the local > >system so everything is done on one machine. > > > >Using HPUX we typically pass 5 messages a second. This system is a dual > >180Mhz K class server so this is surprisingly low performance for this > >system. > > > >When testing on FreeBSD 3.1 we also got 5 messages a second. This system is > >a > >500Mhz P3, this is also unacceptable performance. > > > >When we tested with Linux (kernel 2.2.5) we passed 15 messages a second > >consistently using the exact same P3 described above. > > > >Since the HPUX and FreeBSD numbers are so close I am wondering there is some > >performance tuning that I do not know about. Do you think the number might > >change if multiple hosts were used? > > > >The daemon that reads from the FIFO makes only one connection to the local > >Sendmail to deliver multiple messages in sequence. > > > > > >I REALLY want to use FreeBSD over Linux on this one and need some major help > >to get the performance out of FreeBSD. > > Are you setting the TCP_NODELAY socket option on the SMTP connection? If > not, then please do that and let me know if it fixes the problem or not. > > -DG > > David Greenman > Co-founder/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project - http://www.freebsd.org > Creator of high-performance Internet servers - http://www.terasolutions.com > Pave the road of life with opportunities. > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
