Thank you Tom for your benchmark. So it confirms my results for keep-alive requests
I tried to compile cherokee on Solaris 9 but the make hangs, so I am unable to test cherokee on another OS. I will try on Solaris 10 a next time. Regards 2009/8/2 Tom Peach <[email protected]> > Hi Eric, > Check this out: > > r...@batbox:/usr/apache/bin# ./ab -k -n 100000 -c 20 > http://192.168.1.150/cherokee.html > This is ApacheBench, Version 1.3d <$Revision: 1.73 $> apache-1.3 > Copyright (c) 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, > http://www.zeustech.net/ > Copyright (c) 2006 The Apache Software Foundation, http://www.apache.org/ > > Benchmarking 192.168.1.150 (be patient) > Completed 10000 requests > Completed 20000 requests > Completed 30000 requests > Completed 40000 requests > Completed 50000 requests > Completed 60000 requests > Completed 70000 requests > Completed 80000 requests > Completed 90000 requests > Finished 100000 requests > Server Software: Cherokee > Server Hostname: 192.168.1.150 > Server Port: 80 > > Document Path: /cherokee.html > Document Length: 1798 bytes > > Concurrency Level: 20 > Time taken for tests: 301.469 seconds > Complete requests: 100000 > Failed requests: 36 > (Connect: 18, Length: 18, Exceptions: 0) > Broken pipe errors: 0 > Keep-Alive requests: 0 > Total transferred: 195166816 bytes > HTML transferred: 179769434 bytes > Requests per second: 331.71 [#/sec] (mean) > Time per request: 60.29 [ms] (mean) > Time per request: 3.01 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) > Transfer rate: 647.39 [Kbytes/sec] received > > Connnection Times (ms) > min mean[+/-sd] median max > Connect: 0 40 364.2 0 3391 > Processing: 0 20 24.7 9 401 > Waiting: 2 20 24.7 9 401 > Total: 0 60 364.0 9 3594 > > Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms) > 50% 9 > 66% 17 > 75% 27 > 80% 34 > 90% 55 > 95% 80 > 98% 128 > 99% 3382 > 100% 3594 (last request) > > ee.htmltbox:/usr/apache/bin# ./ab -k -n 100000 -c 20 > http://192.168.1.150/cheroke > This is ApacheBench, Version 1.3d <$Revision: 1.73 $> apache-1.3 > Copyright (c) 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, > http://www.zeustech.net/ > Copyright (c) 2006 The Apache Software Foundation, http://www.apache.org/ > > Benchmarking 192.168.1.150 (be patient) > Completed 10000 requests > Completed 20000 requests > Completed 30000 requests > Completed 40000 requests > Completed 50000 requests > Completed 60000 requests > Completed 70000 requests > Completed 80000 requests > Completed 90000 requests > Finished 100000 requests > Server Software: nginx/0.6.35 > Server Hostname: 192.168.1.150 > Server Port: 80 > > Document Path: /cherokee.html > Document Length: 1798 bytes > > Concurrency Level: 20 > Time taken for tests: 5.831 seconds > Complete requests: 100000 > Failed requests: 0 > Broken pipe errors: 0 > Keep-Alive requests: 100000 > Total transferred: 201500000 bytes > HTML transferred: 179800000 bytes > Requests per second: 17149.72 [#/sec] (mean) > Time per request: 1.17 [ms] (mean) > Time per request: 0.06 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) > Transfer rate: 34556.68 [Kbytes/sec] received > > Connnection Times (ms) > min mean[+/-sd] median max > Connect: 0 0 0.0 0 0 > Processing: 0 1 0.4 1 34 > Waiting: 0 1 0.4 1 33 > Total: 0 1 0.4 1 34 > WARING: The median and mean for the waiting time are not within a normal > deviation > These results are propably not that reliable. > > Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms) > 50% 1 > 66% 1 > 75% 1 > 80% 1 > 90% 1 > 95% 2 > 98% 2 > 99% 2 > 100% 34 (last request) > r...@batbox:/usr/apache/bin# > > > Apache Bench is running from an OpenSolaris 2009.06 Core 2 duo at 1.8Ghz > box with 4GB memory: > SunOS batbox 5.11 snv_111b i86pc i386 i86pc > > The Ubuntu box is my laptop which is a core two at 2.00Ghz with 2GB of ram > Linux batbeast 2.6.28-14-generic #47-Ubuntu SMP Sat Jul 25 00:28:35 UTC > 2009 i686 GNU/Linux. > > I'm on a 1 Gigabit switched network with a similar latency to yours. > > Nginx and Cherokee are from the Ubuntu reps (cherokee from PPA) > > My test is imperfect, since I had plenty of other processes running on my > laptop during the test, and the network is not isolated, but since the > difference is so great I would tend to agree with you that the result is > surprising, it's certainly not in line with the tests I did last October. > > That said I'm not sure serving a small static file is a useful benchmark > for webserver performance since I can't think of an application where this > would be relevent, but if there has been a regression since 0.8 it would be > good to find it. Anyway I leave for holiday in 1 hour so maybe I'll see how > the flamewar has developed by then :-) > > Best Regards, > Tom > > > > > > > > 2009/7/29 Eric Lapouyade <[email protected]> > > Hello Tom, >> >> Here are the informations you requested : >> >> For the client, it is a Sun V240, running Solaris 9 with the latest >> recommended patches >> I was using the apache benchmark from apache 2.2.11. >> >> For the server, it is a DELL Studio intel i7 940 running Ubuntu 9.04 >> started with a server kernel (not a destop kernel) : 2.6.28-11-server >> To know exactly what are inside my linux, I issued a dpkg -l (see >> attachement). >> >> Both servers are on the same IP network, the ping gives a latency of 0.25 >> ms, it is only a 100Mbps network. >> >> I took source code for Nginx 0.8 and 0.7 + Cherokee 0.6 to 0.99 >> All where compile like this : >> ./configure >> make >> make install. >> >> Between two different version of cherokee, I took care to properly >> uninstall previous cherokee version by doing a >> >> make uninstall >> >> That removes everything like libraries etc... >> >> All tests where done with a small static file : the index.html from >> cherokee install (/usr/local/var/www) that is a 1.7K file. >> >> What you have to know, with my tests, I discovered that, with cherokee 0.6 >> and 0.7, the performance are very good, but not with cherokee 0.8 and >> 0.99.20 (Only by using the '-k' from tha 'ab' command, that is having >> keep-alive requests). >> >> I tried the same tests on another PC (my laptop), still using Ubuntu 9.04, >> I got the same kind of result. I did not have tried yet on another linux >> flavor. >> I will try today to install cherokee on Solaris 9 : wait and see... >> >> Best Regards, >> >> Eric >> >> 2009/7/29 Tom Peach <[email protected]> >> >> Hi Eric, >>> Can you please send me your test conditions (details of network you >>> tested over, what spec and OS of the two machines etc etc) so I can try to >>> reproduce your test. >>> >>> I benchmarked Cherokee using some imperfect tests (Apache bench and some >>> robousers requesting php pages, network not isolated) 10 months ago and >>> found Cherokee to be quicker than Lighttpd and Apache and about the same as >>> Nginx but with lower memory footprint under load so obviously I'm surprised >>> to find so much has changed since then. >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> Tom >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Message: 4 >>>> Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:39:03 +0200 >>>> From: Eric Lapouyade <[email protected]> >>>> Subject: [Cherokee] Nginx is 119x faster than Cherokee 0.99.20 ! >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Message-ID: >>>> <[email protected]> >>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I am still benchmarking Cherokee 0.99.20 on Ubuntu 9.04 on an Intel i7 >>>> 940 >>>> (4 cores) >>>> >>>> One month ago, I found that Apache2 was faster than Cherokee (14 000 >>>> Req/s >>>> vs 10 000 Req/s for serving small static files with a 'ab -n 1000 -c >>>> 20') >>>> As I was surprised, Cherokee claim to be the fastest, I was wondering >>>> wether >>>> I have a bad linux environnement. >>>> So I tried Nginx, and this is really surprising : >>>> >>>> For a small static file, Nginx is able to do 25 000 Req/s (ab -n 100000 >>>> -c >>>> 20) and even 59 790 Req/s with the keep-alive (ab -k -n 100000 -c 20) !! >>>> >>>> In the same time, I tried to send keep-alive requests to cherokee (ab -k >>>> -n >>>> 10000 -c 20) and I discovered that performance is falling from 10 000 >>>> Req/s >>>> without keep-alive to only 501 Req/s with keep-alive !!! >>>> >>>> So, with keep-alive, on ubuntu 9.04, Nginx is really 119x faster than >>>> cherokee : >>>> >>>> As I have seen some people in the mailing list having same kind of >>>> slowlyness on Ubuntu 9.04 I wonder whether there is a referenced problem >>>> with this Linux : do you know ? >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Eric >>>> -------------- next part -------------- >>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >>>> URL: >>>> http://lists.octality.com/pipermail/cherokee/attachments/20090728/6fd56c53/attachment-0001.htm >>>> >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Cherokee mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee >>>> >>>> >>>> End of Cherokee Digest, Vol 13, Issue 33 >>>> **************************************** >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Tom Peach >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Cherokee mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee >>> >>> >> > > > -- > Tom Peach > >
_______________________________________________ Cherokee mailing list [email protected] http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee
