On Feb 23, 2004, at 11:11 PM, Cliff Woolley wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Scott Lamb wrote:
significant difference between them. In transferring either big or
small files with httpd-2.0 HEAD and ab over loopback on Darwin
(keepalive on). Which I'd think would be the ideal situation for seeing
an improvement...
Neither ab nor loopback make for a particularly good test of this sort of
thing. I suggest you use flood instead of ab and use two machines instead
of the loopback adapter.
I'll play with it a while. Flood was giving me trouble (couldn't find docs on what the numbers it spat out meant, and the analysis awk script got divide-by-zero errors), so I tried siege for a bit. Had disappointing results, then realized I wasn't anywhere close to saturating the server's CPU or the network. The roughly equal-speed Linux 2.6 client machine is groaning...and it's spending 60% time in softirq, according to top. I recently replaced the network card with some cheap thing; maybe the drivers are just that awful. If so, I'll need to replace it before getting decent benchmarks; it might be a while.
--Cliff
Thanks for the ideas.
Scott
