These look like profiling info from the client side, is that right? It shows a lot of waiting, which indicates the delays are probably in the broker side. Could you please profile the broker while running your timing test?
Thanks, -Steve -- Steve Huston, Riverace Corporation Total Lifecycle Support for Your Networked Applications http://www.riverace.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruno Matos [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 9:36 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: Performance: C++ client - Windows VS LInux > > > On Fri, 2010-09-24 at 11:49 +0100, Bruno Matos wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-09-16 at 07:50 -0400, Steve Huston wrote: > > > Hi Bruno, > > > > > > > Thanks for the reply. > > > > > > You're welcome. > > > > > > > On Mon, 2010-09-13 at 07:06 -0400, Steve Huston wrote: > > > > > Hi Bruno, > > > > > > > > > > > I'm facing some performance issues with a Windows client. I > > > > > > made some tests and the difference is between 625857 > > > > > > microseconds/packet in Windows and 30110 > microseconds/packet > > > > > > in Linux. This is the average of 10.000.000 packets. > > > > > > > > > > > > The windows libs were compiled from svn tag 0.6, > and the Linux > > > > > > libs are from Fodera 13's Yum repos. > > > > > > > > > > What version of Qpid did you test with on Fedora? > > > > > > > > I'm using 0.6. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Some ideas? There are any precopiled distribution > supported by > > > > > > the project? > > > > > > > > > > You can get a Qpid 0.6 installable from > > > > > http://www.riverace.com/qpid/downloads.htm, but it's > 0.6 - probably > > > > > not significantly different from what you tested. > > > > > > > > > > > > > With this libs I get 573361 microseconds/packet. A little > > > > less, but not enough. > > > > > > Right... > > > > > > > > If you get profiling info that may help to improve this, > > > > please let me > > > > > know. I'm also available to help get that information. > > I have two output files from Sleepy, with asynchronous and synchronous > session. Sleepy can be found in www.codersnotes.com/sleepy. > > > > > > > > > I think I will do a simple test program only for this. What > > > > do I need to get useful profiling information? > > > > > > Output from any reasonable performance measurement. Something like > > > Rational Quantify would do it, or one of Intel's thread > measuring tools > > > (I forget the name). > > > > > > > I have a simple program now that sends and receives > messages. It starts > > counting time right before sending (synchronous), and stop > counting when > > message arrives. I get 757 microseconds/packet in Linux and 39118 > > microseconds/packet in Windows as an average of 10.000 > packets. I will > > try Very Sleepy free profiling tool. > > Thank you, > Bruno Matos > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation Project: http://qpid.apache.org Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected]
